Saddened to see that Ms.Rice, NYT and the American Public mention about "...tens of thousands of American service members in the Gulf, our regional partners and Israel directly at risk..", but no mention of the innocent Iranian lives that will be lost for all the wrong policies taken by the US.
The same is the storyline for the Iraq War where there is no mention of the Iraqi lives who wudnt have been killed without this war !!
What moral right America has in the world, other than money and muscle(arms) power ?
39
The idea that likely casualties were never discussed until Trump asked the question ten minutes before launch is simply absurd. That assessment would have been a component of any briefing on potential strike plans. He's just trying to make himself look good, and at the expense of his military advisers who, if you believe this story, look bad, even incompetent, for supposedly not fully briefing the President. It doesn't work like that.
42
@John McD. Remember Trump is surrounded by amateurs, and news cast people, that have no notion of how the world work.
4
@John McD.
It's not that simple. When he was considering the general strategy, he may have heard a number for casualties. That doesn't mean he effectively "processed" it at the moment. Later, he asked again, and he realized, as he says, that the response was not proportional. Thus he made the right decision in time. Of course, he, Donald J. Trump, created all this mess by himself, but this is not what we are discussing now.
3
Excellent analysis and strategy. Unfortunately, it will have about as much effect on the current administration as a note buried in a time capsule. Your best hope is to write this all out by hand, fold it in a complicated origami sculpture, have someone pass it to Trump in study hall, and tell him it's from either MBS or Putin. He'll be out on the White House lawn, waving it around like a hankie, extolling its brilliance. I'm not kidding, and you can thank me later.
247
@Touran9 MBS or Putin? How about Bibi? Pay attention: Russia has gotten no favors or rewards from the US over the last two years. Not one. Yet Bibi has been showered with unimaginable gifts, which could also called thank you notes - for a job well done.
6
@Karekin
Russia has gotten no favors over the past two years? How about Trump not implementing the sanctions against Russia that Congress passed? How about Trump covering up Russia’s manipulation of the 2016 election and ignoring their meddling in the 2020 election? How about Trump lifting sanctions on Manafort’s billionaire Russian oligarch buddy? Russia has done quite well the past two years, thanks to Trump.
14
How did we get to the point where we were 10 minutes away from war with Iran? Simple. The minority of American people elected an idiot to be the "president".
9
The short answer to your OpEd headline is you and the former administration.
5
Susan: Pack your bags and get back to DC pronto. We need you.
9
I, for one, am not convinced that there ever was a planned air strike on Iran. Nancy Pelosi, for one, wasn't advised about any air strike ahead of time, and I haven't seen any independent corroboration - only trump's word, and we all know how reliable that is. Think of it, trump declares that he's halted an air strike that could have killed 150 Iranians, because he's such a compassionate and fair guy who wouldn't put the price of a drone over the value of 150 Iranian lives. He's such a good guy.
But, what if there never was an air strike underway? trump is still the good guy by claiming that he stopped a disproportionate strike on Iranian facilities, and it doesn't cost him a dime. What a great strategy in trump's mind! He halts a non-existent strike at the last minute - everyone wins. Iranian lives aren't lost. No international condemnation for a disproportionate response. trump praises himself as a rational, compassionate leader, and Iran gets the message that he is ready and cocked to strike at Iranian targets, which, of course, will make the Ayatolla shake in his boots. What a perfect plan!! And it doesn't cost a dime and absolutely no risk of something going wrong! All that good stuff & favorable press for free! Can't do better than that!
I only wonder which of his dovish advisers thought of it. Pompeo? Bolton? Not likely. Shanahan? He's gone. Maybe it was trump himself that came up with this genius plan. Nah. That's too far fetched.
6
I don't find it very professional for a former policy advisor to call the sitting president's potential actions "idiotic". Perhaps something along the lines of "ill-advised" would be better suited.
The same can be said for descriptors like "out-of-control", or "hawkish sidekick". For someone who wants to be considered a voice of reason and experience in contrast to Trump, this schoolyard name-calling just brings Ms. Rice down to sounding like Trump himself.
Criticize the president's policies all you like, but name-calling sounds unprofessional bordering on juvenile.
2
But Trump hired guys who DO want war with Iran. They're corporate war profiteers.
7
Ms. Rice, we miss your steady hand and we miss your boss as well.
5
"Susan Rice: How Did We Get 10 Minutes From War With Iran?"
We allowed a lunatic to run for and steal, with the aid of our nation's enemies, the presidency of our country.
9
I wonder, does Ms Rice even think Trump or his cadre of hawks even care what she thinks, says, does or recommends? I sincerely doubt it.
1
I agree with Susan that war should be avoided at all costs.
But she did help negotiate an agreement with Iran that they would wait six years from now(!) to unveil their nuclear weapons.
I sure wish we could figure a way to stop fanatical religious / political leaders who believe in a better afterlife and demand everyone worship them from getting nukes. (I'd make the same wish if it were the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church -- why do you think we gave that religion a "country" inside of Rome?)
Ms. Rice states "Mr. Trump needs to lay out a series of reciprocal steps whereby both sides give a little..." and therein lies the problem.
Such a deal would strike directly at the heart of Mr. Trump's self image. He views himself as a "winner." For him to be a winner. There simply MUST be a loser, for him to be a winner. His entire ego is centered around getting the better of someone, and a win-win resolution deprives him of this satisfaction.
6
We got in this situation because of actions taken by the Obama administration. Those actions gave the Iranian Mullahs a billion
dollars to finance their terrorist operations and a path to a nuclear weapon. The Iranians were emboldened with this power.
1
This may not be all about Iran. Iran is simply used as a pawn in a more elaborate geo-strategic scheme involving China, Russia and Europe and to a lesser extent Gulf states and Israel.
1. Since Trump is embroiled in a trade war with China and needs any leverage to win, threatening to 'obletirate' Iran will impact China oil supply and investment in Iran. Furthermore, destruction of Iran potentially removes a key component of the 'Silk road', China's long term project to challenge US domination.
2. Trump is also concerned Europe may challenge Trump by bypassing US sanctions through 'special purpose' transaction scheme to trade with Iran, rendering the US sanctions useless. Threatening war with Iran may engulf the entire Middle East, NATO and beyond. This will impact Europe energy supply, investments in ME and flood Europe with more refugees. Thus Trump is warning Europe not to trade with Iran.
3. Trump will not start war with Iran unless the Gulf states agree to foot entire the bill of the war and compensate the US.
4. Destroying Iran will also deprive Russia of Iran and its proxies (foot soldiers) to implement its strategy in ME. This will allow Israel to finish off Hezboallah and Syria without Iran's help.
Iran knows it will be destroyed. Thus, it will take down Saudi Arabia, UAE, Israel and US military bases. Iranians will destroy every oil and gas installations in ME with its missiles and proxies. The global economy will collapse in the event of attack on Iran.
2
Ms. Rice, these are all steps that make complete sense and have a good chance of being at least partially successful.
Unfortunately the president won't take this advice because a) he will never read this (the most likely reason) and/or b) because the advice is coming from a person who used to work for Obama, and because of what we can only be described as a personal vendetta, trump seems dead-set against any policies what so ever that originated from his administration as well as anyone associated with it.
5
After the Vietnam, Afghanistan, and especially Iraq wars, I believe the majority of Americans are disgusted at the thought of blundering into another catastrophic war. We will take to the streets to protest more old white men ordering our brave, young soldiers to put their lives on the line over these idiots tragic assumptions and miscalculations.
6
Looks like that John Bolton and Pompayee are planning to bomb Iran's nuclear installations immediately after Friday; ,when Iran will start crack in the nuclear treaty. But this time, no American missiles or jets will be used, rather Israel will be allowed to do this dirty work at the handsome payment from Saudi Arabi and U A E . Wait what Iran can do further and how the new WAR will take shape.
You want no attacks on Israel but Israel feels free to attack Iran any time it wants to. They've killed Iranian scientists and hit sites in Iran but Iran has to promise not to hit back.
Israel is a nuclear nation but Iran is not allowed to be. Iran won't be allowed to accumulate fissile material but Israel is completely free to do whatever it wants. Sounds like it'd be a pretty stupid move for Iran. Israel wants the US to have a war with Iran and is constantly pushing for it.
5
Rational analysis? Courses of action? Expertise?
Pfffft... "I alone can fix it."
4
Does anyone believe that the US drone did not enter Iran's airspace if only briefly? How would the Iranians know that it was only a spy and not an attack? Does anyone believe that Trump called off the attack just 'minutes' before it was 'cocked' and ready to go?
Does anyone believe that; after Trump has imposed crippling sanctions, threatened the destruction of Iran, that the religious leader will meet him for 'talks' and lose face and credibility in his own nation.
Trump has no long-term strategy, no objectives, no plan. Just his one and only tactic: sanction, threaten, then pull back and claim he 'saved the day'.
5
Ms. Rice, your suggestions make a lot of sense. At the same time, the United States was already in a position where it had a dialogue with Iran, and a deal that as a whole lot better than war and this current foolishness.
Mr Trump is out of his dept and surround's did by idiots and warmongers. While he ended up making the right call, to me it is downright scary that he trusts "his gut" more than his advisors (the idiots and warmongers). This is wrong on so many levels.
How do you convince a president determined to undo everything the previous president had accomplished, because..., to do the right thing?
3
This writer does not seem to understand either - you have no business going to war unless your own country is seriously attacked - and not for the sake of Israel either. They are big kids now.
3
For the Iranians Trump has no credibility. Why come back to the bargaining table with someone who is clearly a liar and cheat?
4
Trump would start a war just because he thinks it will get him votes. The problem with his logic is that because it is so easy to see that Trump is the provoker and instigator, he will lose votes instead. No one wants the US to start a senseless and needless war.
In order to get elected, @BarackObama will start a war with Iran.
~Trump Nov 29, 2011
Now that Obama’s poll numbers are in tailspin – watch for him to launch a strike in Libya or Iran. He is desperate.
~Trump Oct. 9, 2012
Don't let Obama play the Iran card in order to start a war in order to get elected--be careful Republicans!
~Trump Oct. 22, 2012
Barack Obama will attack Iran in the not too distant future because it will help him win the election
~ Trump Nov 14, 2011 (repeated 14X)
https://www.salon.com/2019/05/17/trump-warned-us-a-desperate-president-would-attack-iran-to-win-re-election/
5
"Iran may refuse to talk."
I am compelled to ask why anyone would consent to talk to a nation that walks out on treaties, whose president changes his mind every news cycle and who coddles up to the world's worst dictators. The will be no progress towards meaningful negotiation - or peace - as long as Donald Trump occupies the White House. The Iranian leadership may not be nice, but they're not stupid.
57
Reasonable but disconnected from current reality given what it (sadly) is. Trump's game is appearance of toughness and he can hardly afford more of the opposite by offering what might appear to be concessions (he might offer those if Iran agrees to talk but not publish them beforehand). Posting red lines at this point would (a) sound like Obama, and (b) are as likely to appear to give a pass on anything not explicitly articulated.
1
Doesn’t all this make you sick to your stomach. Remember Rodney King, when he emotionally said, “Why can’t we all just get along?” In the Middle Ages, and more recently, its Protestant vs. Catholic, then its Christian vs. Muslim, then its Sunni vs Shiite. Here in the US it was/is racial cruelty against blacks and native Americans. I could go on and on pitting one group against another. Humans never learn; they never get it. Now its all happening in the age of weapons of mass destruction. I wish everyone around the world would get up every morning and listen first thing to “Love is the answer” by England Dan and John Ford Coley. Start off with your priorities straight and live that way.
3
Can we please stop writing these editorials as if Trump is a) logical. b) plans anything c) understands consequential thinking and d) is emotionally mature. He's a malignant narcissist; appeals to reason, to empathy, or to ethics do not work. Stop acting like anything about having him in the White House is normal; he is our modern, mad Nero. Stop acting as if he is sane.
2
We got within 10 minutes of a war with Iran because we have a childish, impetuous, narcissistic dotard in the White House, an unprincipled liar who creates a crisis just to make it appear that only he can solve it. The longer his Republican enablers let him get away with it, the more dangerous he becomes.
1
Surprisingly short on tact if it was a genuine attempt to influence President Trump. Stroking him (from a distance) works better than punching him.
1
"If President Trump is being truthful...." it would be a first!
1
You're asking Trump to act like a responsible adult. That's so cute.
1
When one enters negotiations with the primary goal of regime change in Iran, do you thnk that is not telegraphed to the Iranians? "We would like to talk and negotiate. But what we really want is to get rid of you". That message is delivered by WHO you put in place to deliver it. You are suggesting intelligent, seasoned, reasonable people who can look at Iran, it's history, and consider our relationship with them over the years, and who would be trusted by the Iranians as respected negotiators would be acceptable to Trump. He sends in people who negotiate like it's a WWE wrestling match. What people want, no matter their politics or religion, is to be treated as equals. They don't have to be. They have to feel like that. Trump treats people like he treats women. Force yourself on them. Because when you are a star, they let you. Hard to get the other side to give you what you want when you treat everone that way. When you are about to shove your hand down a woman's pants while you pin her against the wall, but then you say "I really don't want to do this" and pull your hand away doesn't really give anyone a good vibe. Or instill any level of trust whatsoever. Especially when the next words out of your mouth are "I won't be so nice next time".
1
"How on earth did we find ourselves 10 minutes from an idiotic war without the president having weighed the consequences?"
V.I. Putin is your answer.
2
The 2002 authorization to use force against Al Qaeda underlies much of Trump's presidential abuse of war power. Ambassador Rice is correct that it has been wildly contorted. Just for starters, Al Qaeda members are Sunni Muslims while Iranians are Shiite. Congress should repeal the 2002 authorization and reclaim its constitutional power to declare - or refuse to declare - war.
3
There's absolutely no way Trump is going to follow any plan that has more than about two steps. Yours has five.
2
Oh, come on, really, Susan Rice.
You've just offered Donald Trump five complicated suggestions, in a row.
This to a man who likely cannot locate Isphahan on a map and who imagines the Persian Gulf has something to do with golf.
Bolton and Pompeo and torturer Haspel, the Republican mindless, are what once were called "war mongers," but to a population with its national baseball hat turned backwards and who, like Trump, will allow someone else to die, it's entertainment.
Suggest to your old boss that he begin to speak out. That would get Trump's attention and the nation might detect a contrast in quality between the two.
4
"How Did We Get 10 Minutes From War With Iran?"
There have been and there will be many questions like this till Trump is rid from our lives next November, and the question is as easy to answer as saying-"because of an obscure machination called the 'electoral college' the United States did not elect a person that the majority of the voters saw as the person fit to lead this country. Donald Trump is the President of the Electoral College. Clinton, the far more ready, intelligent and capable person is really the President of the Popular vote, she won the major cities with their more intelligent voters. Trump is the President of rural America, he got the "good ol boy" vote, the disaffected vote, the anger vote. So now we have a President who talks a good game but lacks the scope of knowledge and analytical thinking of a Clinton or Obama, people who study the issues and look at the long range impact of their decisions. Trump a real estate mogul who has spent his whole life selling expensive apartments to the super rich knows very little of world affairs, most of his viewpoints come from fox news, so he has a limited grasp of complicated issues. He leans on people like Bolton because he can expect their views to mirror fox news, he wants people who 'do' rather than over-analyze. The accidental president's ego grows everyday, and he is beginning to believe the sycophants around him.
The electoral college is your answer, the majority voted for the other candidate.
2
This is one of the best, maybe the best, I have read in the Times since Trump said he was ready to obliterate and then told us, taking us for complete fools. that only at the last minute did he learn that 165 civilians might be killed.
It seems to me that report after report and even a few European politicians said that they had to praise him for his ability to make such a wise decision. Misplaced fairness.
So thanks Susan Rice. We all know that the President at least is incapable of any structured thought and the others may be capable but since one of them, Pompeo, has God's word as starting point reasoned argument built on wrong premise leads only to the "last days of America".
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Citizen US SE
3
Always amusing to read Obama alumni trying to, sorta-kinda say nice things about the Monster-in-Chief without, well..saying something nice.
Ms. Rice is now in the apparatchik's post-government-service mode, busily rewriting history and proving that her successors are not up to the job that she so skillfully discharged. History? You listening?
The author posits a president who thinks ahead, has a strategy, and plans for contingencies. Ms. Rice, you're blue-skying here. You know better.
Ms. Rice, it is far too late to offer rational arguments and strategy to Donald Trump and his completely dysfunctional administration. It is like throwing spaghetti at a wall and hoping some of it will stick. You are aiming your energies at NYT readers who though already agreeing with you, have absolutely no influence. You cannot affect the thinking of Trump, Bolton and Pompeo. There is no there there.
2
The same way we almost went to war over Cuba- Men are in charge of these decisions. Very bad idea.
1
"Eliminating the nuclear threat of Iran must be every president's priority." Notwithstanding the wisdom of this assertion, can America put a choke-hold on Iranian economy and expect to achieve this goal? Even a cat can give some injury when cornered.
And in Iran there are several millions young people who were born after the Mullahs took over the control. Many, if not all, of them have seen Americans always threatening their country. Of course, some of their leaders were foolish enough to raise slogans against Israel; but only after Israel refused to make a fair deal with Palestinians. A majority of these young men are in the Iranian National Guards. Certainly they can make more than a scratch on Any President's face.
And, if the President acts like "a loose cannon" (Mrs Clinton's description of Mr Trump), no compliance from Iran is expected. Let's hope some cool heads step forward and defuse the awful tension.
1
There was one reason why Trump didn’t act.. the eyeballs. It got all our eyeballs on him in a self-manufactured cliff hanger, forcing us all to stay tuned in to see what our crazy President would do next.
The eyeballs. That’s why he did it. That’s why he does anything. That’s why he does everything.
3
Ms Rice correctly begins her article by questioning trumps veracity. Clearly, he is not to be believed. He's a poseur being let around by an ancient hawk who has been advocating bombing Iran for decades because he equates bellicosity with being "strong".
28
Since the President ambled up to the brink of open hostilities with Iran, the question is where from here? The direction the President seems to have opted for are more aggressive actions towards Iran short of a shooting war. Ratchet up sanctions? There's not much left to sanction. Cyber warfare? What does that entail? Walking back current policy and seeking diplomatic resolutions? Not currently in the President's team's lexicon.
What would a war with Iran look like? It's time for someone(s) knowledgeable to lay that scenario out for us. What will it be? Shock and awe, followed by an amphibious landing on the shores of Iran. Shutting down Maritime traffic, the Saudis and Israel jump in and on and on. No thank-you.
Artibus, diplomacy please.
1
Susan Rice is, not surprisingly, being complete disingenuous.
The Obama Administration fundamentally made a bad deal, hoping that treating Iran like any other nation would encourage them to behave like other any other nation, but that was not to be. They further compounded the error by pretending that this was a treaty that was binding on the United States in perpetuity, whereas it was an executive order, and could be undone by any succeeding president. The Republican Congress at the time explicitly warned Iran that this was the case.
Now that it is obvious that Iran continued its ballistic missile development and shipping of weapons to Syria, Yemen, and other bad players, Rice wants to claim that trying to stop Iran is a bad idea. Wrong.
And this notion that we are close to "war" is disingenuous too, just like Obama's claim that the choice at the time was his deal or war. Nonsense. There are many hot spots around the world where there is a flash of violence, and things calm down again.
The right strategy here is to simply keep the sanctions going.
They are hurting Iran pretty badly, and that's why Iran is trying to ignite a bigger flame - to pressure Europe into pressuring the U.S. to back off.
The Iranians need to understand that they can have an economy OR they can cause trouble around the world.
Not both.
2
@G It's funny the Saudis have never been made to face that choice. From the Taliban, to 9-11, to the Khashoggi murder, to the war in Yemen, they've caused the world trouble aplenty.
Former NSA Rice offers sensible, measured and expert advice.
That's only one of the reasons Trump won't follow it.
He also won't follow it because:
a) she's a former member of the Obama administration,
b) she's black, and
c) she's a woman.
If Rice were more strategic, she'd recommend Trump bomb Iran. Then his contrariness might actually lead to peace.
7
Short history as seen from an Iranian view. 1953 CIA helped remove the democratically elected prime minister and put the dictator Shah of Iran in place. He was ousted 1979 by the Revolution. 1980-1988 the US paid billions of dollars to Saddam Hussein to "punish" Iran in the Iran Iraq war. The US invades Iraq 2003 and makes the country Shia led and thus a partner with Iran. The "punishment" of Iran for not obeying the US will has continued and the opening of a dialogue with the Iran nuclear deal 2015 was rejected by the current US government. A war with Iran now might trigger a WWIII. Time for dialogue with Iran.
8
Reading Ms. Rice's piece makes me yearn for the days when grown ups had serious discussions about serious matters in the White House. Those days seem so far in the past now.
8
Did the US spy plane intrude into the Iranian air space, if, as reported, the Iranians warned the spy plane for 10 minutes, and if the warnings were received and processed by the US commanders? In making the decision to launch an attack on Iran, again the President should have asked for and critically examined the risks and collateral damage. It looks amateurish and foolish that he would wait to assess the collateral damage until10 minutes before the launch of the mission.
Can the world of nations create conditions and guarantees to make Middle East free of weapons of mass destruction - nuclear, chemical and biological that will be acceptable to all the countries in the region? If not, the alternative is the status quo that will negatively impact the access and delivery of energy resources from the region.
Only in a country like the US where an architect for a completely failed policy of regime change in Iraq, Mr. Bolton, is made the National Security Advisor. It shows the level of incompetence on the part of Trump in selecting Mr. Bolton for the crucial post.
The funding for the creation and sustaining ISIS came from the donors in Saudi Arabia and other gulf countries. Iran does not fund the dissemination of the destructive Wahhabi ideology and poisoning the minds of the Islamic youth around the world, the ideology that sanctions the beheading people of non Islamic faiths. Saudi Arabia is a greater threat to world peace that needs to be addressed before taking on Iran.
13
Right now, we are in a mess.
This all goes back to our decision to withdraw from the Nuclear Deal. This was unilateral on our part. While Iran was in compliance with the Agreement, there was no justification to do so. In the eyes of our allies, and the other signatories to the Agreement, we have lost credibility.
The Nuclear Deal should have been allowed to be in place, and resorted to diplomacy - which we are now trying to seek, and find it is a lost option. With the Deal in place, corrections or improvements to the Agreement would have been a possibility.
We are now reimposing sanctions on Iran. We are fast isolating that country. Both US and Iran continue to trade with threats. It is unclear what we want to achieve and what our strategy is?
8
Congress should be consulted before any Commander-in-Chief launches an attack against another country. Democrats or Republicans, it doesn't matter who occupies the White House.
We cannot allow one person to make such a consequential decision. The costs and risks are far too high.
20
Ms. Rice, like most American pundits, writes as if the US and Iran are equally to blame for being 10-minutes away from war. The reality is that it is the US unilaterally -- by reneging on the nuclear deal, by imposing crippling sanctions, by putting a show of force on Iran's doorsteps -- that is beating the drums of war. And is Iran the only 'malign actor' in the region? There seems to be some mealy-mouthed consensus in US journalism for false equivalencies, for half-truths, and for simply biased reporting. If the NYT has any journalistic integrity and backbone, it is time for clearer reporting and bolder stances.
22
@Ajax This is not a reporting piece by a journalist. It is an opinion piece by a former government official. Therefore, it is not "biased reporting", and the NYT need not be criticized for it. Whether or not you agree with the opinion is a separate issue.
1
Ms. Rice is not a pundit. She held the role of national security advisor, is a life-long career national security expert, and was pointing out the poor decisions the US, under Trump and his flunkies, have made in all dealings with Iran. Go back and read this again - with your eyes open this time around.
1
@Ajax, You clearly did not read the article, nothing you said makes any sense at all.
1
If Trump doesn't want a war with Iran why does he hire hawkish advisers who continually beat that drum? Trump is a confused and arrogant individual who can't make competent decisions about national security or anything else.
17
"President Trump’s decision to withdraw from the nuclear deal and impose crippling sanctions, when Iran was in full compliance, was foolish and, predictably, has backfired."
Translation: Trump hates everything Obama. He never cares about the repercussions to anyone. Never.
24
Our prez is out of control if not out of his mind. He pokes at honest nests all over the globe causing chaos and dystopic outcomes. 10 minutes from another catastrophic war in the Middle East. Why? cause he wanted to make his deal with the Iranians and negate Obama's. For 2 more years we and the world hold our collective breath hoping for his removal from office.
17
Before we move on, a $130 million drone was shot down, right?
And it looks like everyone’s sure that was the right choice for a lure you’ll waggle along a hostile nation’s border to see if you can provoke them into shooting it down.
How about a kite? Make it red, white and blue, if that will inflate patriotic passion in your voter base.
Admittedly, the kite couldn’t carry all the super-duper cameras and sensors I can’t even imagine because if I did, Bolton would have to kill me.
And surely, we do need to know more about Iran’s defenses; we’ve only been monitoring them around the clock with satellites, manned airplanes, drones, and Googlemaps for about 40 years.
But if the Iranians didn’t install a new death ray a few days ago, I think the kite would have done the job better.
Trump’s chicken-hawks would still have their excuse to start incinerating people who have done Americans no harm at all, and U.S. taxpayers could start earning 1% interest at their savings bank on the price of the drone.
Hey, $130 million saved is $130 million earned!
8
Is it me or is it starting to feel like 2003 again? Seems every time we elect a GOP prez, we end up concocting a reason to go to war in some far-off desert. Perhaps Mr. T realized he didn't want his legacy to be one word like W - In T's case substitute N for Q. Of course, right now his legacy is also one word - Russia...
5
Susan is correct: Bolton and Pompeo have got to go. Good grief. Pompeo is possibly worse than Bolton (just read his bio). Indoctrinated, blind. These people live in an alternate reality driven by greed for power. Off the charts. Please!
12
Calling Trump's actions foolish (and by implication, him a fool) and referring to his 'massive mistakes' while giving you satisfaction no doubt, are likely all that Trump will remember - If he ever reads this op-ed. Might have been better to avoid the ad hominem attack.
I would love to read more about why Bolton and Pompeo have this pathological need to be in conflict (with Iran, North Korea, China...).
2
Ms. Rice worked for Barack Obama, so her sensible ideas will never ever be considered by Trump and the boys.
10
Bolton: So close, so close, so close, so close. so close
Pompeo: Next time, next time, next time, next time
Rice: Sometimes yes, sometimes no, sometimes yes, sometimes no
1
@Robert Roth- Trump: Wait, what?
France, Germany, Britain, China, and Russia will meet on June 28 in Vienna to look at ways to tackle the challenges arising from the withdrawal and reimposition of sanctions by the United States on Iran. It is clear that these countries still want to salvage parts of what Trump dumped. Predictably no representative from the U.S. will be at the diplomatic table. Would this not be a logical place for the U.S. to open negotiations with the participation of our allies and for that matter our adversarial stake holders the crisis like Russia and China? Diplomacy seems to be a dirty word in Trump's administration.
1
Any deal with the US subject to presidential revocation on a whim if it hasn’t been ratified by the Senate as a treaty.
I'm afraid Trump has already made the decision to go to war.
With the start of his 2020 campaign now going, I feel he has decided that a new war would energize his campaign and try to draw more support from voters next year. I really doubt he cares much about the potential lives that may be lost if it helps him gain support. The same with Bolton and Pompeo.
If this does happen I hope the electorate will see through it.
4
Susan Rice, who helped conceive of, prepare and implement a policy that turned a blind eye to Iranian support for terrorism in the vain hope that economic assistance and kicking Iran's nuclear can down the road would lead to regime change and democratic transition in Tehran, is the last person on earth who should be chastising Mr. Trump.
5
@Frank J Haydn If the Iranians support terrorism in their own neighborhood, it is nothing compared to the indiscriminate global terrorism of the US government and military.
4
How nice to be reminded of what a rational, sensible foreign policy looks like. Dr. Rice represents what used to be expected of our leaders. You may quibble with some of the content, but the structure of sanity is obvious. Unlike our current WH occupant, who seems unable to grasp the simplest concept of how to behave in public or act like something other than a sandbox bully. He embarrasses our country with each incoherent utterance and self-defeating deed.
13
If Trump, Bolton, and Pompeo wanted to deliver Iran on a platter to more Russian influence and armaments, they couldn’t do a better job.
The continuation of their policy of maximum pressure and threats of war will lead to one thing: A mutual defense treaty between Iran and Russia.
Is this Putin’s goal? Are our leaders really Russian puppets as we feared?
3
how did we get here? because ... "her emails" and all the associated hatred, misogyny, fear and racism led to our current situation.
2
Ah, if only Ms. Rice were president, we wouldn't be in this mess. Instead, the electoral college chose to elect a man with no diplomatic experience into a perilous world, one in which the entire annihilation of human kind is possible.
The Republicans have managed, for the last couple of decades, to convince their base that education is evil and isolationism is good, and so, a president with no knowledge of the job, one who simply acts out the role as a tough guy (and perhaps we all know what happens if you scratch a tough guy), came to be the ruler of the free world.
So now what, Republicans? What are you going to do now?
5
Ambassador Rice lost Trump with the first word of this piece — If.
The notion that POTUS will swallow the — I got it terribly wrong admonishment — is delusional. That he in concert with Pompeo and Bolton will follow her prescription is even more outlandish.
The Presidential election already looms large sixteen moths out meaning that Trump will most certainly concede nothing for the sake of measured and rational governance.
"If President Trump is to be believed" is a terrible opening statement for your opinion piece It sets the tone for embarrassing credulity. He is never to be believed as most of us have observed....never!
5
As we speak of "proportionate responses' -- unmentioned in these articles and among comments is the fact that the US shot down an Iranian civilian airliner in July 1988 with some 290 aboard; the deadly shot came from the USS Vincennes, nicknamed "Robo-cruiser" at the time for its aggressive coommand posture.
Tragic events (of our doing) such as these do not [and should not] fade from memory. This history, coupled with the USA's in-again, out-again posture toward negotiating with Iran -- particularly our unilateral withdrawal from the multilateral nuclear agreement THAT WAS WORKING, per our own intelligence analysts -- seems to be forgotten by the bellicose cabal of warmongers that now surround the president. The same goes for the Red State Republicans clamoring to "hold Iran responsible." For what? Responding to US unilateral withdrawal from a treaty that was negotiated, and for furthering imposing crushing economic sanctions to force Iran's regime to change?
Get rid of the uninformed, shoot first, ask later chicken hawks who surround Trump, and seek out experienced and reasonable minds who are sincere about finding a resolution to Mideast differences besides blowing the place up.
2
When over 60 Million Americans believe they too can get rich by voting for a Television Billionaire and live vicariously through his bigotry, racism and malice; the world gets a Donald Trump...and no amount of sage advise will break through to him- or them.
We're all preaching to the proverbial choir. Those who could stop this human wrecking ball- won't and just as one person brought a colonial power to its knees (Gandhi) one person can destroy the psyche and global good will.
2
Dr. Rice, of course this is the way it all should be done. Of course, none of it relates to the potentialities of the current administration, the prospects for Congressional intervention, or worst, the sloppy thoughts of the public.
So, who needs to read this? Children, I think, as a concrete example of what used to be American civic process. Maybe even an animated short voiced by revered actors or athletes.
Back when schools had this subject called civics, we had hokey filmstrips and “educational” movies that bored us for hours, but somehow, I think, left a residue of faith in our system of government. That faith has been in tatters for most of my life, partly because of foreign affairs, criminal wars and the purchase of government by private interests. Maybe you can help the children...
2
All excellent recommendations from Susan Rice, unfortunately, she is expecting Trump to follow logic, and that's not his MO, especially from some intellectual Obama official who actually took her job seriously, - Sucker!
That's too big a leap for someone of such weak moral fiber to handle, plus his base sees diplomacy and compromise as weakness. I mean, if speaking in euphemisms could pass for leadership, or even deal making, we may have the Russians to thank for Trump; but alas we're stuck with our fingers crossed hoping clearer minds prevail. Incompetence, dishonesty, greed, ignorance, temper tantrums, and a lack of conscience are not qualities we need; but it is what we got!
2
This is a stunningly well thought out plan ... for the Obama administration.
First and foremost Donald has utterly and totally destroyed the international credibility of the United States. I needn't list all the agreements that he has unilaterally removed us from without discussions with anyone. **No one in his right mind would believe that anything Trump says today will still be applicable tomorrow.**
Dr. Rice's exceptional plan could only work if promises made were promises kept. But the only promises Trump keeps, superficially, are those made to his base in order to be reelected. And he lies about those when he can: "the wall is being built ...", "the tax plan isn't for me...", "there's going to be a better, cheaper health program ..."
We need to "sideline" Trump himself, as well as Bolton and Pompeo, then go for a while, say 10 years, while keeping every promise we make and consulting with allies on issues that affect all of us. Then and only then will Dr. Rice's plan work.
2
Personally I would rather bury the hatchet with every nation and declare a medication holiday like policy where we reaccess world issues. However if you believe we have to keep Nuclear weapons from the Middle East, then what Europe had agreed to was a bit naive for that purpose.
There was no strike ordered. This is pure bluster.
By now, how could anyone in the world believe a single word out of trump's mouth?
4
The same way we destabilized Libya and Syria and endangered the very foundations of the EU with the consequent tsunami of refugees.Angela Merkel has been one of the unintended victims of this misadventure.
"Susan Rice: How Did We Get 10 Minutes From War With Iran?"
In my humble opinion, the whole business of "10 Minutes From War With Iran" is another Trump nonsense. Neither Mr. Trump nor the US navy has ever cared about losses on the "enemy" side. Low enemy losses has never been a military objective and will never become one. If Mr. Trump was concerned about human losses in a war, he would have stopped the Saudis from dropping US bombs on starving children in Yemen.
Anyone who knows anything about military planning will tell you that "loss estimates" (for both sides) are generated early in the planning stage. So, either Mr. Trump has been snoozing during presentation of the plan or the story about "a General told me 150 people will die" never happened.
The more realistic scenario is this: After Iranians shot down a tiny drone flying in high altitude in their airspace, the US military realized that Iranian air defense system is much more lethal than they had originally thought. So, they went back and revised their loss estimates. And when Mr. Trump saw the new no's and realized that many body bags could be coming home and the next day many US pilots could appear on Iranian TV, he changed his mind.
On second thought, Mr. Trump cannot be the person who stopped the bombing. This decision is inconsistent with the philosophy of "The Art of the Deal". I actually think it was Pompeo who stopped the attack, realizing that his future presidential ambitions could be at risk.
2
@Eddie B.
Hardly a "tiny drone"--RQ-4 has a wingspan greater than a Boeing 737 and almost that of a 757.
Susan Rice's article on the Iran matter excellent with her most important point that of the 10 minute delay before the strike that could have started another bungled and costly war in the Middle East. How indeed was there no lengthy discussion before Trump's decision to halt? Too close to be comfortable, it would behoove this president to consider Rice's proposals, most especially those regarding his hot-to-war Bolton and Pompeo and all that has followed the withdrawal from the nuclear deal. How comfortable do I feel believing that Trump et al will consider any of Rice's ideas? Not at all.
3
Negotiating with Iran is clearly a job for Jared Kushner. He has the time now that his plan to buy off the Palestinians is bearing fruit and the Middle East political peace plan, is again ready to roll out, again.
In the meantime, Trump is no doubt looking for a way to blame Democrats for emboldening Iran.
2
Rearrange the protesters: WAR ON to NO WAR?
How can you trust a commander who orders air and sea strikes which might involve 125 casualties or more on the US side, and minutes-- or 2 hours-- later reverses himself because of a potential loss of Iranian lives. With such faux compassion, he then says he might order military action which would "obliterate" Iran. How could he accomplish that without causing massive direct and collateral loss of life on both sides?
Sanctions are like warfare with weapons from the Dollar Store. Cheaper and broadly targeted to the general population.
He needs to start with something more fundamental. He needs to acknowledge that Iran has the right to exist as a nation independent of Israel, Saudi Arabia and us. If he starts there, maybe he will end up where Obama did, protecting us all from the worst elements of the current Iranian government and hoping that more moderate factions strengthen and ultimately prevail in what has been a great nation and civilization for far longer than any others in the region.
1
Susan Rice's comments on Trump's handling of Iran make me long for the days of cooler heads circa 2008-2016. Let's hope we get more thoughtful leadership in 2020.
3
The big problem is that a way out would require Trump to act with "uncharacteristic clarity".
That ain't going to happen. Is it too late to invoke the 25th Amendment?
3
The main problem is that the Constitution gives Congress, and Congress alone, the power to declare war. That Congress has chosen to abandon this power to a variety of resolutions does not change the fact that it is their power and their responsibility. I hope this incident will remind them of this fact and move them to action.
10
Thank you for offering a clear, step-by-step instructions on how to mend our treaty with Iran. I just hope Trump takes the advice and follows these instructions. If he is successful, it would be his first real accomplishment after taking office, although he did create the mess himself in the first place.
5
The answer to the headline question involves four steps. First, US voters elected Trump. Second, Trump withdrew the US from the nuclear treaty with Iran. Third, Trump imposed sanctions on Iran. Four, Trump appointed Pompeo and Bolton to the top foreign policy positions. It’s simple. One, two, three, four, the US is 10 minutes from war.
18
@Susan Piper
BAM—you nailed it. And in addition to reminding me, with your last line, of the Country Joe McDonald “Gimme an F” song (“And it’s one, two, three—what are we fighting for?”) you brought to mind an admonition from Nietsche: “If you set out to fight monsters be careful you don’t become one.”
Unfortunately, the current president of the United States is uninformed as well as inexperienced, but, most importantly, he does not care. This lack of self-awareness merely adds to his sense of defiance. The real danger is a president who thinks he knows everything, thinks he is therefore an expert on all issues both foreign and domestic, and has the support (and encouragement) of a craven Republican party. In the words of so many feckless congressman, "Let us pray." That may be the only thing that can help America.
12
Given close encounters and recalls in foreign affairs, Trump is trying to look like a reasonable head of a super power even within the 10 minutes of a brush with World War 3. He wants his image to be of a thoughtful, cool, intelligent leader who wants the scare the .... out of the smaller, less powerful states like Iran. Thinking like a sandbox micro- aggressor, Trump sends his volley over the bow of the ship of Iran which says do you really want to continue with the limpet mines on tankers? Susan Rice sounds like a cautious, seasoned diplomat, not a macho warrior who could have a war, kill thousands innocent or not, and spend billions without blinking. Who would Iran take seriously to rein in the Revolutionary Guards?
3
@Boston Born. Not trump! The Iranians have successfully called his bluff. He backed down with no plan. The world has recognized an empty vessel that makes a lot of noise and nothing else!
1
"Susan Rice: How Trump Can Avoid War With Iran"
Phony president Trump cannot avoid war with Iran, any more than he can tell the truth or exhibit normal human qualities. Trump has been making war one way or another his entire miserable life. The result of inestimable narcissism and other mental and emotional problems, Donald Trump, like dictators and would-be dictators of history, must have foils and scapegoats to criticize, blame, insult, accuse, and if necessary outright eradicate. While Iran is most certainly not blameless for much of what it is accused over these many decades, Trump, unable to fully focus his hate upon immigrants—at least at the moment—has in Iran the perfect outlet for his rage, his need to punish, his absolute necessity to exact as much pain as possible, no matter the cost to that country, the entire Middle East, America and the world. Such are the actions of a truly sick man to whom power has been handed.
11
Re "If President Trump is to be believed..."
That's always going to be the $64,000 with a person who habitually tells lies. It's a truly insidious way of undermining not just the truth, but for some people, the very existence of truth.
3
@CB Evans
Indeed. Strange how anyone believes that "with 10 minutes to go" silliness. Trump made it up to save face and to pose, yet again, as a president.
It didn't pass the sniff test.
But the issues Susan Rice raises remain very real.
Trump since his explosion into American politics has given us nothing but a barbaric club. Diplomacy like reading a book or taking advice just is not in his vocabulary. His last minute ploy to appear tough with a war action then take it back at the last moment was nothing but an expression of his bludgeon methods. In the final analysis Trump will claim that war with Iran will not be his fault and that is all that matters to him, despite every action he has taken to foster that war.
Last week the Republican controlled Senate woke up for a moment and voted to deny Trump weapons for Saudi Arabia. Waiting for Trump to wake up is a fool's errand. Will this continue? In the end the only real option is to head theTrump slide into war is to vote out Republicans and put more sensible Democrats into responsible positions, but would it come soon enough?
4
Pres. Trump has already made it abundantly clear to the Iranians, sanctions will continue and war averted as long as Tehran's mullahs do not attack American personnel, do not acquire nuclear weapons and do not directly attack Israel, or any other country for that matter.
1
Face it, this is all much too complicated for our National Cinderblock to understand.
3
This 'administration', and whatever hijacked foreign policy is driving it towards a "war" (read invasion and endless conflict that our 'leaders' foment wherever/whenever they wish) need to be replaced as soon as possible.
Even the title here speaks of an assumption that is pure propaganda, and has been printed simply to continue the manipulation of a woefully uninformed public. Tell a big lie, over and over and over and pretty soon it becomes 'the truth.' How does it feel, Susan, to be a cog on the wheel of death that begins rolling over and squishing the life out of innocent people on this planet every 20 years or so? What other possible reason could there have been for Trump to become president?
Our society and those of other nations on this rock need to focus on countless other worthwhile endeavors, two of which--the removal of fossil fuels as a consideration in foreign policy decisions, and the rendering of nuclear weapons as obsolete--should be at the forefront of our collective endeavors. Instead, we are still throwing sticks and stones at each other over the magic dark liquid under the sand and which gods we think are on our side.
5 out of 100 Americans could point to Iran on a map and only 1 of them might be able to tell you who Hassan Rouhani is. And yet, their children will be sent into a meat grinder 12,000 miles away because 'eliminating the Iranian nuclear threat must be any president’s priority.'
History repeating itself before our eyes...again.
3
"If President Trump is to be believed..."
With these words, Rice opened her cogent, sensible assessment of the U.S. Iran situation and her logical suggestions on how to move forward. As tensions simmer and we face the ongoing risk of sudden escalation, her diplomatic advice, which has approximately 0.0 percent chance of being heeded by Trump's administration, graphically illustrates the dangerous incompetence of Trump and his team.
Trump's description of how he called off the strike on Iran is an obvious fabrication. Is it a bluff? Did he really call off a strike at the last minute? Was he properly briefed? Did he pay attention? All of these questions are legitimate, given Trump's well known reputation for lying, ignorance and tiny attention span. Herein lies the fundamental problem with president Donald Trump; he is profoundly untrustworthy. He unilaterally, against the advice of every involved nation and many of his own advisors, tore up the Iran deal. The current crisis is entirely of his making. What motivation would Iran possibly have to negotiate with Trump when any resultant deal might be broken at Trump's whim?
The American people installed as president a frivolous, boastful grifter. He now has complete decision-making authority on matters of great urgency and import. Rice's advice illuminates the stark incompetence of Trump's presidency and the potential peril it might lead to. And still, Democrats dither on impeachment because of optics.
4
@Rob
You're spot on until the last sentence.
I don't see dithering. I see strategic calculations aimed at ridding the nation of Individual One. We're not in Kansas anymore, and the possibility that impeachment proceedings fires up Trump's base for next November is quite real.
The Republicans found this out when they impeached Bill Clinton -- the most recent test case. They were seen as politically motivated. The more convincing way to remove Trump from office is at the polls in November 2020.
Meanwhile, hearings into Trump's violations of law and the Constitution should proceed as Exhibit A for the electorate.
@Rob
The optics are not the only reason the Democrats hesitate before going in for impeachment. I would suggest that we would rather be sure to get the rascal out for the present and the next four years. I agree with your assessment of the peril we all face as this 10 minute situation reveals.
Ms Rice is espousing a thoughtful, critically reasoned approach from Trump?
Our reality show star is not capable. He can only bluster, bluff and use the cliffhanger to boost ratings for next week's show.
The Iranian putsch is being made by Bebe and the House of Saud - let's be clear.
Trump could not find Tehran on a map.
5
Once again these White House lawn gaggles Trump's taken to to replace the time-honored back and forth exchanges we've typically relied on during Press Briefings show just how inept, artless, unsophisticated, and naive Trump truly is.
He's a loose cannon out there, uninformed because of his gross ignorance due to the fact he avoids getting briefed in a timely fashion, all the while, placing American interests at risk.
One minute he's spouting all that silly, chest pounding, garrulous bluster threatening Iran, only having to reel it in once, and most likely, he gets educated.
Obviously someone pointed out his showboat blathering was toying with increasing world energy prices because of something called the Strait of Hormuz. It's located between Oman and Iran and the world's most important oil transit checkpoint.
2
We already had an agreement with Iran that Trump tore up for political reasons and now finds himself trying to recreate it. This not ready for prime time administration is on the verge of stumbling into a war due to their ignorance.
3
When James Mattis was on the job, at least we had one reasoning intellect in the administration that could buffer the Stable Genius.
Same deal with Rex Tillerson.
Now we appear to have military leaders who were perfectly willing to blow up Iran and start a horrible new conflict in the middle east.
It's up to us to declare as forcefully as possible to the administration through all available means that we will not tolerate a war.
1
A quotation from Matthew 7:6 in Jesus's Sermon on the Mount: "Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in pieces."
Susan Rice, a former national security adviser and UN ambassador herself, is wasting her time giving Trump and his administration her valuable and tangible advice how to get the US out of this quagmire.
No doubt Iran might reconsider talks with the US if William Burns or Thomas Pickering, both highly respectable and seasoned diplomats who had dealt with Iran in the past, were dispatched. But Trump has his son-in-law, who is “secretary of everything.”
Having destroyed one of Obama's foreign policy achievements, he doesn't want to be remided of his predecessor's legacy, let alone listening to those who served the former administration.
Trump's narcissism and megalomania threaten global stability in multiple ways. He would only seek to break the ice with Iran, if he saw a 1972 Nixon-Mao moment that would earn him a place in history.
Any normalisation of US foreign policy requires a “regime-change” – not in Tehran, but in Washington in 2020.
4
For this administration, sensible suggestions like these, all critical analyses and dire warnings are flicked off as fake news. These blanket dismissals are accepted by this administration's supporters who are convinced that the mainstream media is in cahoots with the Democrats to destroy Trump and everything he stands for, while swallowing the daily lies Trump feeds to the TV cameras and to his tweets.
1
The path to justice and mercy is always illuminated by truth. The "drone" is designed, produced, and supported by Northrop Grummon. They know all about it. So lets have the print out of the gps coordinates transmitted from the drone at the moment it was hit. Let's have the President declassify just enough for a former independently compensated Northrup engineer explain it all to the Times. Follow the truth, Mr. Trump, it really will set you free. You might even discover you are who you said you were.
2
I think our problems started with our cancelling of the Agreement we had with Iran and other nations. That was working but it was something Obama did so Trump had to get rid of it.
1
You're asking way too much of Trump and his "advisors." They don't seem to be capable of any kind of thinking that isn't jingoistic or is in any way sophisticated.
2
It was theatrical. Trump just wanted Iran to believe that he was seriously serious about a military move.
1
All these recommendations make sense. But at the top of the list should be the easing of sanctions.
Remember it is the US, not Iran that withdrew from the treaty. And even while Iran continued to adhere to its terms it is the US that imposed sanctions.
Why? Because the Trump administration didn't like the treaty that was carefully negotiated by the Obama administration. And what were the flaws in the treaty? We don't know and neither do the Iranians.
This is a very technical treaty based on how nuclear reactors operate and how fuel under certain conditions could be turned into weapons grade. Vague assertions that the treaty "is terrible" say nothing other than Trump still sees himself having to out do or undo anything Obama accomplished.
This childish behavior is not only bad policy, but this totally unnecessary confrontation showed it is also very dangerous.
However, the real problem lies with Bolton and Pompeo, not Trump. Both are war mongers intent on the fantasy of regime change in Iran and both are egged on by Netanyahu who expects America to fight wars of its choosing.
As for carefully considering civilian casualties when considering the use of force I hope there that Trump does not emulate Obama's drone wars. Out of some 2,500 people killed, estimates are that 2,300 were innocent civilians simply living in proximity to America's targets.
This is why many in this region continue to hate us.
65
I take note of rice's detailed list of possible actions that comprise an overall policy of pragmatic negotiation. the trump administration, as always, acts with blustered hubris to demand compliance or face compulsion by force. NO ONE will willingly agree to slavery, yet the trump administration swaggers like a school yard bully to force all opposition to their knees, including our democrats, our media, and now another sovereign country. the problem in this case is not Iran but trump's attitude of my way or the highway
46
This article is unbelievable. A foreign policy official from the administration that literally created the mess the President has to clean up, is giving him advice. Not surprisingly, she's wrong on most counts. President Trump's policy actions show both clarity and a thought-out plan, and is on track to achieve results, and what will still be a very difficult process.
Re-enter the JCPOA, is that what Ms. Rice really proposes? Hold back on sanctions? It's like the Obama-era foreign policy establishment never learns anything. Never.
President Trump would do well to ignore such advice. The parts of it he does follow - he was already doing. I'm certain three first year students in International Affairs could do better than the totally unrealistic approach recommended in this article.
Finally, maybe a conversation would be better received if Ms. Rice didn't pepper the article with insults, and false characterizations of the President's policy based on the pre-disposed biases of the anti-Trump crowd.
1
@Daniel Do you really believe this? Serious question because it made me laugh.
I'm fascinated that anyone could truly believe that this foreign policy team is coherent in approach. How could it be if Trump, by his own admission, doesn't read briefings, and if, by his own admission, he didn't ask for or get presented with the ramifications of his own decision to attack. So he is either a liar or incompetent. What is the other choice? You don't have to like the former nuclear deal to see this.
2
Daniel, your bed is infested with fleas but nonetheless, it is your bed and in it you must sleep. Good luck.
1
The dilemma the Iranians have is that they haven't learned yet the art of deal-making with Trump. This is something the Emiraties and Saudis have been practicing for sometime now. Money talks. If they make the right offer (maybe a hotel in Tehran), sanctions will be lifted same day.
4
Susan Rice should know that Trump would never follow her roadmap as former high-level Clinton official. If Trump were to read this, he would use it as an anti-roadmap, doing the opposite of what she says.
23
Ms. Rice seems to have some good ideas here, but her own record in Rwanda and Libya certainly got mixed reviews. When will our foreign policy in general go from war hawk/interventionist to one of peacekeeping, with a much smaller military footprint around the world?
32
@Ellen
If you act; you have risk of things going wrong. If they do, it doesn't necessarily mean you acted wrongly. But, if you did act wrongly with best intentions, at least you acted!
6
Ms. Rice sounds rational but she accepts far too much of this country's official rationalizations. Anyone who doesn't stress that the entire confrontation is due to Trump's reneging on a successful agreement and starting a war with Iran by attacking its economy (which is an act of war), is not facing the true situation.
176
@Fourteen14 War does solve problems. Maybe it doesn't solve this problem but to pretend war doesn't solve problems is unthinking. That isn't even a pro-war comment.
5
@Fourteen14
Get rid of the military?
All I can say is that I am extremely pleased to know that your tax dollars go a very, very long way to supporting the institution that preserves and protects our national freedoms.
1
@Thomas Zaslavsky
“Ms Rice sound rational”... Is she being a bit oblivious of her past?
“...truth, whose mother is history, who is the rival of time, depository of deeds, witness of the past, example and lesson to the present, and warning to the future.”. ― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
A Foreign Affairs article in February went over the 2011 US intervention in Libya.
It concludes, “Obama intervention in Libya was an abject failure...Libya has not only failed to evolve into a democracy; it devolved into a failed state.”
Truth is Ms. rice has forgotten it was she, together with Samantha Powers and Sec.of State Clinton who “overcame internal opposition from Defense Secretary Robert Gates, security adviser Thomas E. Donilon, and counterterrorism adviser John Brennan, to have the administration advance a UN proposal to impose a no-fly zone over Libya and authorize other military actions as necessary.” Wikipedia
1
America gave its word then broke it.
Why would anyone, much less the Iranians, engage in talks when our word has proven meaningless and of no honor?
We need to resume the old agreement --keep our word, then see about talks about other issues . . .
221
@Marty O'Toole Resuming the old agreement might appeal to Trump. Didn't he attack NAFTA and then replace it with a carbon copy? He only cares about achieving the appearance of success rather real success for the country. The only success he cares about getting his base to the polls in sufficient numbers to win election.
11
@Marty O'Toole
American gave no such word. The JCPOA was not ratified by Congress. It was a creation of the Obama administration.
And yes, the Iranians should engage in talks because they are suffering economically and will continue to do so, with what I believe is the very real prospect of internal revolution.
@Frank J Haydn
You are cherry picking here to support what Trump has done.
(From Wikipedia)
"In a letter sent to then U.S. Representative Mike Pompeo, the U.S. State Department said that the JCPOA "is not a treaty or an executive agreement, and is not a signed document".[367]
According to the Congressional Research Service, different definitions for 'treaty' are used in international law and in domestic U.S. law. Under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties "The term "treaty" has a broader meaning under international law than under domestic law. Under international law, "treaty" refers to any binding international agreement. Vienna Convention, art. 1(a). Under domestic law, "treaty" signifies only those binding international agreements that have received the advice and consent of the Senate."[368]”
As usual, republicans look for ways to manipulate anything that they can use to support their warped policies.
15
Ms. Rice is introducing a concept that has not yet found its way into the Trump administration:
THOUGHT.
16
The problem with Trump is that he can't admit to making a mistake. What this means is: America is stuck in a delicate situation until another president, with cooler thoughts, can renegotiate an Iranian deal. Hopefully, Iran realizes that 2020 is around the corner and can wait for a new president. The Iranian conflict is really in the hands of the voters. Your vote is important!
13
Susan Rice is speaking like a diplomat. The simple equation tRump will consider in making a decision about Iran is: how much money will this make for my corporate MI donors and how will it impact my approval ratings and reeelect chances?
15
@William Park THIS IS IT! Trump is motivated by his ratings/polls. A report I read the other day said that Tucker Carlson told him if he went to war then he should forget about being re=elected. BINGO!!!!!!!!
1
It took 66 years to get to this ten minutes, ever since the US and UK conspired to overthrow Mossadegh—Iran’s democratically elected leader—in 1953. It goes without saying that it was about oil.
If Susan Rice’s memo crossed Trump’s desk, he would glance at it for ten seconds then stash it in his drawer, thinking to himself that he knows better. With Trump it is all about political theater and survival, and no doubt Khamenei has his own constituents to appease. Trump gets to cover all his bases, presenting himself as both the hawkish strongman and enlightened dove and ostensibly strengthening his negotiating hand. But Trump better not hold his breath, because Khamenei has expressed no interest in coming to the negotiating table.
The likelihood of small acts of sabotage and saber rattling is much higher than all-out war. The appropriate image is of two silverback gorillas thumping their chests and hooting at one another without inflicting any serious damage. But Iran’s support of Hamas and Hezbollah and aspirations toward a nuclear arsenal have to be reined in.
It is still about oil, but the algorithm is complicated by Trump’s relationships with Sheldon Adelson, Mohammed bin Salman, and Mohammed bin Zayed.
Having China patrol the Strait of Hormuz and the Gulf of Oman is a great idea. As long as they do not develop other ideas.
9
@Andrew Shin What about our support of Israel who is very provocative in that region. Most of the solutions I see are about Iran giving up something but Israel and the US give up nothing. It's a one sided debate.
1
@Bill
The US alliance with Israel reaps benefits -- intelligence cooperation and all that stems therefrom -- that cannot be discussed publicly because of their sensitivity.
The US does not have to give up anything because you and I pay taxes to ensure that we are a dominant global power with all the responsibilities that accrue from that position.
Iran supports terrorism.
There is NO comparison.
1
@Frank J Haydn We and Israel support terrorism. I always hear about the wonderful benefits our alliance with Israel gives us but never see them. Now I find out it's too sensitive to discuss. That's how governments hide things from the people.
Smart, well-reasoned advice from a sensible administration. Unfortunately, it will fall on deaf ears in a shoot-from-the-hip administration which for once didn't shoot. An administration that destroyed a working nuclear deal with Iran, trampled the critical Paris accord, destroyed the State Dept. and the EPA, and created thoughtless international tensions -- isn't about to start thinking sensibly, but rather how to save face.
17
Alas, Ms. Rice apparently labors under the delusion that Trump is willing to listen to people who know what they're talking about. Doesn't she know that he's a "very stable genius" who knows more about everything than anyone else?
27
Thank you. This article is elegant, clear, and forceful. And for the years prior to this which no doubt saw other equally good advice, thanks again.
21
Politics being the art of the possible, what is being asked of Trump here is impossible, and everybody knows it. Trump cannot manage, nor can anybody around him. This is just a reality show Presidency, only with real world consequences.
Do you want evidence of this? Most cabinet members are acting. Pompeo as Secretary of State , much like Bolton, knows nothing but regime change. Our "foreign policy" should not default to regime change like most people change their underwear. But sadly, that is where we are.
We are isolated and alone on the world stage. Calling for negotiations, while laudable in theory, is fantasy land. Nobody is going to do it because a) their ego's are fragile, and b) it would require actual work, not playing golf in Florida.
I still think that this is just a "Wag the Dog" scenario building, in order to distract from the continuous investigations. Wait until the economy turns down, and the investigations heat up. Only this time it won't be Albania. It will be Iran.
15
All this sounds eminently sensible...but it's an awful lot of work. So Trump won't do it.
19
In the early 1960s, when the Russians shot down a spy plane, it was a huge embarrassment for the US. Russia had a right to their airspace and we weren't supposed to be there. Now the warmongers in the White House are interpreting the downing of a spy plane as a reason for war. What happened in 60 years?
Also this story reminds me of US shenanigans a few decades ago. The US announced that a North African ruler had fired on US military ships in "international waters". I checked a map and found that the "international waters" were a large bay surrounded by African land. The incident was equivalent to some hostile power sending warboats into the Gulf of Mexico or the Great Lakes and daring the US to fight. So now the warmongers are complaining that Iran shot at a plane a few kilometers outside their borders. (Think "a few miles from Long Island").
5
One does not need to be a national security advisor to know that Trump is, through the authority he has as president, creating the chaos, ie, “mess,” he does in so much of what he involves himself with. This clearly is in order to maintain ... in reality, actually ... his being the center of attention. It is that that supports his ego, ie, he feels important and in command when with the nation, if not the rest of the world, paused anxiously in suspense to see what he’ll do next. Is this dangerous? Of course it is; but that’s not the issue with him. His main concern is himself. The real question comes to, What were the American people thinking about when they elected such a self-possessed individual to lead them? Yes, Trump can be blamed for a lot; but the blame goes deeper and, though not in particular, it’s with “us” collectively speaking.
19
The Founders put the war-declaration power on Congress, ensuring that no one person could get us in a war and that a declaration of war would be preceded by discussion and debate. But nowadays nobody pays any attention to that.
Since the end of World War II, we've had a Korean War, a Vietnam War, a Mideast War. How may of those wars were declared following the Constitutional rules? None of them. How much money (not to mention lives) have they cost? Trillions.
Somebody once asked Sir Arthur Clarke why the technological advances predicted in "2001" never occurred. He said "the money went to Vietnam instead of research." To an undeclared war.
13
These seem like great ideas and I am in no place to critique Susan Rice anyway. But, I will argue that this is how the Democrats and other anti-Trumpers need to work with Trump. Instead of barraging him with insults, they need to treat him like an adult and assume that he can handle actual strategy. The fact that he did not allow for a strike on Iran gives all of us hope that there is a rational side to him. Of course, there is way too much evidence to the contrary but if Dems try to win 2020 based on insulting Trump, it will be a tough road.
There is evidence that Trump does not support war and that he does not want entanglements in the Middle East. For once, Trump is the adult in the room and needs to find even better adults, like Ms. Rice mentions, to deal with this problem. Bolton and Pompeo are dangerous and clearly not up for the task.
6
@Anthony
Fine but he’s getting too much credit. It is just as likely that,as in the past, trump will do the exact opposite tomorrow. As one of my friends would often say, “Even a blind squirrel finds an acorn now and then.”
6
@Anthony. You're overestimating Trump. He ha snot shown any sign that he should be treated like an adult. He made a good decision in not attacking Iran, but it never should have gotten to "ten minutes to spare." That was Trump being his usual drama queen. The best way to handle Trump is to rein him in every chance you can. Otherwise, you can count on the dramatics to continue. It's the drama that matters with him, nothing else.
1
@Ernest Ciambarella You might very well be right. I have a hard time believing that Trump is an adult in any room, but his instincts clearly worked in that scenario. Unfortunately, I don't know how long he can hold off the war hawks.
“If President Trump is being truthful.” Well, that’s the problem right there, isn’t it? He has already demonstrated on a daily basis—and for many years—that he is incapable of being truthful even with himself, much less with others. That the fate of the world may hinge on the pathological self-delusions of such a personality wholly untethered to truth or even reality goes well beyond sobering.
22
I am very afraid to say that the entire amount of time Trump spent on his "decision" was probably less than 10 minutes from start to finish. How would we in the U.S. process and react to an admission that Kim Jong Un cancelled an attack 10 minutes before it was carried out. Mad Men all.
15
Any person who thinks that Donald Trump is capable of even one of these actions is seriously deluding themselves. His leadership begins and ends with threats of lawsuits and exploiting other people's greed. I didn't see those on the list.
16
Our best hope for sanity in foreign policy is a long 18 months from now when the present administration is removed from office. Let's all hope and pray we will survive till then.
11
The piece is thoughtful and full of good ideas. Sadly, the last sentence brings an 'ah, there's the rub' reaction. Mr. Trump never, ever admits mistakes nor can I imagine him climbing down from the heights of his foolishness.
As to both sides having contributed to where we are now - well, maybe. Iran has long been a bad actor; it has participated with Trump in recent weeks in tit-for-tat escalation. That said, Iran made an agreement with the US & others and abided by it. Trump pulled the rug out from under it, then decided to punish Iran severely for what? For things not in the deal?
The sane response would have been to try to build on what was already working. Instead the grand "art of the deal" guy decided to trash the whole thing based on his narcissistic, irrational belief that he could magically make a "better" nuclear deal while simultaneously bringing Iran to heal on all of its other behavior.
I'm surprised that there hasn't been a tweet saying, "Who knew nuclear weapons and world peace were so complicated?"
15
Sound advice but expect to fall on deaf ears MS Rice. I believe the only way we can avoid confrontation or outright war with Iran is to get Congress to step up to the plate and assert their authority.
11
Bob It seem, Bob, that you are aiming at Trump and not Iran. I think that explains all.
What is missing from Ms. Rice’s excellent article is that Congressional leadership needs to be brought into the decision- making process to observe it and be lobbied by the executive branch , then covene an emergency meeting of their bodies and after informing their members of whatever the decision is, and whatever their own approval or disapproval of it is ,vote it up or down. Action or no action, yea or nay. Either tie the Executive’s hands or free it to act.
Military action requires the support of the electorate in order to succeed. I want and deserve to know what my representatives believed to be the right choice and went on record to support or oppose. The decision belongs to Congress and Congress alone.
5
John C
My god, I am glad you are not a national security advisor. The process you describe would take months! By that time, our forces would have been defeated. It's called modern warfare, guy. It happens fast. The Commander must decide in minutes/hours. Anything else is a certain kind of surrender, which is the Obama doctrine.
It's obviously too much to ask a political demagogue of the left or right to assume the non-violent tact of a Gandhi to a terrorist state. But even Trump's measured cyber attack on Iran was unnecessary aggression. It doesn't take much imagination to guess the Democratic response if Iran had launched a cyber attack against our missile defense systems? The goal of our Middle East policy however ought to be a regional collaboration of all nations there. A war with Iran cannot rule out nuclear weapons deployed by either side, nor an opportunistic alliance with North Korea or other American adversaries to exploit our military attention. We might win the war, but we'd lose any peace.
We don't serve our national interests by exacerbating tensions between Iran and Israel's tacit Arab partners in perpetual crisis cycles. They don't have to love one another for them to learn the benefits of an end to diplomacy "from the barrel of a gun." But our leaders first need to learn that lesson themselves.
1
Ms. Rice’s fifth proposal should have been her first. Iran requires a good faith effort from the U.S. to come to the table. Absent that talks will not happen.
Unfortunately, the administration thinks it is in the driver’s seat with its economic sanctions on Iran. What is never discussed is Iran’s Ace in the Whole-the mining of the Strait of Hormuz and the gulf of Oman. That would leave the U.S. with two options: 1. Go to the barging table, or 2. All out war with Iran. Pushed to the economic brink, Iran may choose mining. Their leadership may conclude there is nothing left to lose. The administration wants the U.S. public to believe that conquering Iran will be like the Iraq war. However, it will be more like the Viet Nam war- spending trillions of dollars and leaving with our tail between our legs.
4
Our conflict with Iran began many decades agi when we financed a coup -- upsetting a democratically elected government so that a Western stooge Shah could be installed to protect Western oil baron exploitation of Iranian oil wealth. It continued with our support, via intelligence data, of Saddam Hussein's attempts to expand his domain into Iran. It was not helped by exports of our cheap, subsidized grain surplus into Iran, underpricing local farmers and driving them into poverty. As for defending Israel, it is a nuclear power with advanced military technology quite capable of defending itself from Iran. It furthermore is not, as many seem to believe, our 51st state. It is a sovereign, prosperous Middle Eastern nation, with expansionist ambitions, feared by its neighbors.
18
This is the ad-hoc administration. Trump doesn't get, or want, coherent policy. He likes to keep his enemies (including political ones) "off-balance" and the country suffers for it.
His concept of "the best people" and mine re polar opposites. He actively foments infighting by his staff, apparently enjoying the power struggles below him. Many of these power players are not required to receive the consent of Congress to serve, certainly were not elected, and they have their hands on the most dangerous levers of government. The resumes of most of his appointees for senior positions wouldn't pass a General Service level employee qualification review. I still don't understand how most of his self-dealing cabinet passed security clearance checks.
This is government run like a small family business, with the same desired outcomes - personal enrichment and adulation from his base.
22
With all due respect to Ms Rice's suggestions, this ain't gonna happen. We need to, somehow, until the next election, hopefully with the help of Congress in the form of legislation or resolution, prevent this president and his war mongers from bullying us into a real war with Iran because he can't back down. Europeans, Russia and China should not go along with Trump. The Iranians have pride and these threats are misguided and dangerous.
Why is Trump messing with Iran, taking the Saudi's side to boot? We have no real authority or any desire for good will towards Iran. They are gleeful to prove that they can fight back and that in fact need to be nuclear more than ever because of threats. to their well-being.
8
“Mr. Trump may lack the guts to use real diplomacy or ease any pressure.” That line, if read, will ensure he trashes the entire thoughtful essay. Having followed and admired most of Susan Rice’s writing for over 20 years I was struck by this forceful language. Assume she was motivated by the frustration we feel in this dangerous era when we yearn for intelligence, rationality, and compassion from those in power. Hmmm, who could provide such leadership?
4
Anne W. Patchell
One more off-topic, hate Trump response. Were it a mere political stunt, I would not worry; hate dissapates somewhat naturally. But it is a national security issue, and liberal hatred is not even appropriate. Stop the hatred of Trump and try to back your country. I myself continued to support the country when Obama decided to conduct drone warfare against Yemen and a number of other places, despite his warmongering actions.
Here is the problem---yes, agree that this confrontation, along with the sanctions, could open up a real-time diplomatic conversation--But, to begin that conversation you would need realistic goals and an a diplomatic team skilled in the nuances of middle east negotiations. Trump has neither---his goal is regime change and he had no diplomatic bench.
8
Great article MS Rice! Two problems, 1) trump is incapable of understanding a nuanced anything that is not a three word slogan, and 2) You worked for Obama.
Thanks for the article though, it helped me understand the issues in a troubled area.
24
Playing with toy solders used to be a game in the 40’s and 50’s that most of us played. Back then, the United States was a model of military might! We were the “saviors” to the world against tyranny and evil.
In a few short years, it seems all of that has been wiped away like the tide does at the seashore when we build sand castles.
I know that politics has always been around, but when I was growing up, I really didn’t know the difference between a Republican or a Democrat. It was kind of like the difference between a Presbyterian and a Methodist. More of a club than something you would fight over.
Donald Trump was playing a game with “toy soldiers” the other night, without realizing that war isn’t a game! Iran isn’t Iraq or Syria. They have real soldiers. They have real weapons. They’re willing to die for their principles.
Susan gave Donald Trump a roadmap on how we can stop this insanity. Will he take it? If he doesn’t, then the 2020 election may be too late.
11
As I was reading Ms. Rice's article describing thoughtful, rational, strategic actions to disfuse the crisis Mr. Trump started by walking away from the nuclear deal, and her ideas to rekindle talks with Iran, I couldn't help but think of President Obama and his team. It made me feel secure, safer, and confident, and praying we can avert another regional (perhaps global) catastrophe.
21
@kg This are intelligent people that studied and work hard to understand the global function of the world, not armature news cast people (Fox) that are blind with hate and political propaganda, that don't care about others people life.
1
Thank you for this reasoned and coolheaded assessment of the steps President Trump needs to take in order to avoid war with Iran.
I would add, Trump should run the Boston Marathon wearing a pink bunny suit; this last is actually more likely to happen than any of the actions you have enumerated.
30
Thank goodness President Trump had the wisdom not to engage in warfare with Iran. Of course he considered that option; all Presidents have been presented with such options at times of actual or potential crisis, and have weighed the possibility of active engagement.
And, as Ms. Rice surely knows, the US was much closer to war with Iran back in 1988, when it shot down Iran Air flight 655, an Iranian civilian airliner that was shot down by the missile cruiser USS Vincennes over the Strait of Hormuz, killing all 290 people on board. The passenger plane, which was in Iranian airspace, had been incorrectly identified as a fighter jet.
It is important to recall that Ms. Rice during her tenure as national security advisor supported US attacks on Libya and Syria, and is therefore hardly an unbiased commenter.
6
@Mon Ray As a result, you disagree with her analysis? Or are you just denigrating her opinion because she is providing a rational way forward to a President that has behaved irrationally?
5
@Mon Ray I think “wisdom” is pushing things a bit far. He put us into this mess because of oversized ego. He is in way over his head. Unfortunately, he will Do ANYTHING to protect that ego, including sending us to war. He could care less how many people around him suffer. He has proved that he is incapable of empathy or wisdom.
While I agree with Ms. Rice on most of her advice, I do have questions.
When Israel is quite capable of defending itself and has kept the Palestinians at bay, and the Mid-East in general, why are they living in fear of Iran?
Why is the only talk of "Iran's malign behavior", when we have shown the same behavior towards Iran under Trump, Bolton and Pompeo.
For instance accusing Iran of bombing Merchant ships, when a Japanese owner says his ship was hit by a "flying projectile"? You do not hear Abe declaring war on Iran. Or stating that Iran shot down a drone in International airspace without offering any evidence?
I am skeptical of all in the Administration who would push for war with Iran or with any other nation for that matter. We should have inconclusive evidence, not just Merchant ships injured where no lives were, before we start rattling our sabres.
14
There is another option Ms. Rice doesn't mention: simply leave the area.
After all, there is no compelling reason for *any* American forces to be stationed in the vicinity. Iran is already under sanctions, so there is no vital economic interest to protect. True, there is a great deal of oil shipping in the Persian Gulf, but the Saudis (our allies) could easily build a pipeline to the Red Sea across their own territory, which is largely uninhabited. Other nearby producers such as Kuwait, UAE, Qatar, and Bahrain are close enough that they could readily connect to such a distribution system.
True, they might object to paying some rent to the Saudis, but given the president's close relationship to the Kingdom, surely there's a wonderful opportunity there to make a grand deal?
Frankly speaking, it is simply idiotic that we've come 10 minutes from war simply to protect Gulf shipping and our own pride. When anyone complains about the cost of renewable energy, remind them please of the enormous expense and geopolitical danger that we consider as "normal" simply to keep the Iranians from interfering in the Gulf. Our thirst for oil (and the worlds') is not worth this level of danger and the hefty price tag.
20
It would also be nice if Trump had a college education and could read and write. No, he's a draft-dodger who went to military school. There is no finer example of a paper tiger anywhere ... great at beating up subordinates, but a big chicken when it comes to people his own size. He listens to no one and jumps from conclusion to opposite conclusion without the usual intervening steps of thought and consideration.
50
Great article and great advice. Ms.Rice is professional versus the black hole of incompetence.
39
Well said Ms. Rice. However Mr Trump is incapable of taking advice. Your fine and sensible words are wasted on the choir.
10
Sorry, Ms. Rice, but you have no credibility with me whatsoever. Did you not, as U.S. Ambassador to the U.N., cheerlead the bombing of Libya and Syria, with the resulting civil wars, attack on Benghazi and the chaos that followed?
Much as I detest Trump, his prevention of a potentially unstoppable war was better than your triggering of two.
9
@Hamid Varzi
It’s preposterous to give trump credit for preventing a “potentially unstoppable war” the conditions for which he alone created. It’s like applauding as a hero someone who goes into a crowded public space, pulls out an assault rifle, scares the bejeezus out of everyone, and changes their mind before pulling the trigger.
39
@RickyDick
You completely missed my point, especially the "Much as I detest Trump" intro.
I was criticising Susan Rice's appalling record rather than praising Trump. I wrote in various earlier posts that Trump's about-face was for personal political reasons only.
Susan Rice directly contributed to the destruction of Libya and Syria, creating a void filled by ISIS which was infinitely worse than Qaddafi and Assad combined. Even the alleged gas attacks by Assad were strongly disputed, among many, by Robert Fisk of the prestigious Independent newspaper who visited the area and spoke to locals and hospital staff.
Yes, Qaddafi's and Assad's regimes were brutal, but nothing compared to the sadistic, exuberant cruelty of ISIS.
Trump? Pompeo? Bolton? What about the endless drumbeat from Netanyahu and others? How is it even possible that an article like this can be written without even mentioning Israel's involvement in pushing this administration to the brink? I realize this is Ms. Rice's opinion, but this omission shows a serious flaw in how this entire story is being reported and discussed.
26
A five point plan seems uncharacteristic for the administration.
18
We didn't. The timeline is all wrong, and the whole thing is about Trump trying to convince us what a "great leader" he is.
I don't believe the Trump administration's narrative about Iran at all right now. It's more distraction from the con man.
Notice how the Japanese have refused to go along with it.
24
I suspect Ms. Rice well knows that her suggestions will fall on deaf ears. Trump is not into making nice with anyone unless he thinks it will benefit him personally. Plus, he never admits a mistake, no matter how egregious.
Then, there's his MO of creating crises and chaos, followed by his claim that only he can clean it up, followed then by a claim that if the cleanup doesn't work, it's because he was thwarted by those untrustworthy Dems.
Diplomacy takes time, major efforts involving several parties, and actual expertise, none of which defines Trump.
But, nice try, Ms. Rice.
32
Diplomacy also takes understanding foreign affairs and reading the PDB. This president’s preferred reading has always been Page Six.
13
President Obama's nuclear deal was pretty darned good. Iran was in full compliance. Obama's deal needed only the usual adjustments. Restoring Obama's deal and undoing some of the sanctions is Ms. Rice's number 5. Restoring the deal and undoing all of the sanctions should be number 1. It goes without saying that none of this would have happened had Mr. Trump not reneged on the deal, motivated by his personal racist animosity toward our first black president.
61
There is no chance Trump will reach any sensible deal with Iran. He can't go back on his confrontational course without looking like a waffling loser. He chose a side, that of Netanyahu and the Saudis, and will have to stick to it. The Iranians will never trust him even with a penny anyway, for good reason. America has lost all credibility as a diplomatic actor. If diplomatic treaties become worthless as soon as the administration changes, making treaties with a democracy becomes useless.
The best we can hope for is that somehow Trump avoids a shooting war until the election and loses that election. A new president, with a team of non-warmongers and less beholden to Israel and the Saudis, will have a chance to resolve the issue.
The mystery remains why Trump surrounds himself with all these lunatic warmongers and aspiring war criminals. Probably just because nobody else wants to work for him.
25
Well said, Ms. Rice. Would you consider serving in your former position as National Security Advisor again? This President needs your advice.
12
The US foreign policy on Iran has always been puzzling and unsettling. A peeling of the onion will probably reveal that our distrust of Iran has more to do with appeasement of Saudi Arabia and Israel than it has to do with any explicit threats by Iran toward the US. Let us remember that we kick started Iran on the path to fundamentalism by engineering a coup against Mossadegh in the 1950s. This idiotic Iran policy far predates the Trump years
The mistrust has cost us a lot of money as well lost opportunities in the region. Besides, Iran has built extremely strong relations with Russia, China and India much more so than these other nations have done with the US. Any US threat to Iranian interests risk alienation with the three large powers in that region. In the face of poor leadership from the US, these three nations are much more inclined to form their own political and economic bloc. Furthermore, our arrogance is preventing us from recognizing that we are hardly the force we once were in that region.
Appeasement of Israel is costing us a lot more than we bargained for. Let the British handle the unholy mess they created in that region. American taxpayers don't own the British burden.
10
@Plato
American politicians, well those with any sense, are aware of the cost of appeasing Israel, they just want to keep their constituents unaware of the cost. With the aid of the U.S. media over the past 50 years they've done a good job of keeping U.S. citizens in the dark by creating false bogeymen to attack. The U.S. has increased the mess initially created by the Brits, and the U.S. went along with it from the get go.
1
Susan Rice lays out a coherent policy on Iran. Unfortunately Trump has no foreign policy. He has conceit, relationships, and deals. Those are not considerations in foreign policy.
Even with hired speech writers he has no foreign policy that can be articulated.
He always wants to make a deal.
Diplomacy requires tact and politeness. Things Trump never exhibits. For Trump it is all bluster, bravado and baloney. And blunder.
The past week was a national disgrace.
Speaking on his own he is not able to describe the history of our relationship with Iran, or any nation for that matter. An ignorant man wandering from crisis to crisis.
43
I thought Trump wanted a more ethnically pure Europe?
Someone might want to tell him what will happen in terms of mass migration to Europe if he upends Iran.
7
Nefarious? Malign? The US has military bases in Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, UAE, Oman, Turkey and Afghanistan. The Israel air force with a nuclear capability is minutes to Iran's west. The Iranians suffered the US imposed Shah. The US supported and supplied weapons for Saddam Hussein's unprovoked war against Iran which resulted in more than half a million casualties to Iran. And now US sanctions are meant to throttle Iran's economy and government. It's a 'vicious, hostile place' according to your president, Donald Trump. Ms. Rice's descriptions are off the mark. The Iranians are at war and defending themselves.
16
@Ray Man. The Shah was placed per Iran's constitution, at the request of parliamentarians and mullahs, after Mossadegh dissolved parliament.
2
@Jim
Check your facts; try "CIA & Operation Ajax"
..."If President Trump is being truthful" Now what are the chances of that?
15
Susan Rice doesn't get it: you cannot first take unilateral steps and then call for reciprocity when you withdraw them.
Yes, unilaterally withdrawing sanctions will be humiliating. But that is good. Those sanctions were unjust - in fact plainly criminal. Being forced to withdraw them might cause Trump - and his successors - to think twice before they once again start such brinkmanship.
8
Congress must re-assert its Constitutional authority to declare war, and prohibit this president from initiating any military action.
Trump lacks the intellectual capacity and motivation to understand foreign policy, or to grasp the consequences of the decisions his war-loving advisers press him into. If Congress is unwilling to remove him through impeachment, it should at least limit his now unchecked power to plunge us into a war that will kill millions.
29
@Charlie B
Wishful thinking. The Republican Senate and those in the House love Trump's distractions . The only problem with this particular distraction is it could lead to a Nuclear War.
4
Everyone here must be sure that djt will never read anything. We can make all the logical and illogical arguments, but djt will make a decision based on what makes him lovable. Why don't we all just tell him, "Hey, Dude, We love you, now leave the rest of the world alone" See, if all of us tell him we love him, maybe he will be happy and go away forever.
10
Trump could start a war entirely based on a whim or his mood.
No thought processes are really ever involved.
14
@Grove
Yes. Disordered, narcissistic split personality in constant conflict. Out of control, chaos.
It was wonderful to read what might happen if there were a wise grownup in the room, in the form of Susan Rice, but Trump listens only to his base -- via proxies like Tucker Carlson and Steve Bannon, who opposed the war.
I suppose credit is due, but it's a reminder of what a dangerous and strange world we live when those are your real policy makers.
13
To believe that Trump is capable of rationale behavior is irrational. Trump's mission since he started the Presidency was to crush and destroy all of Obama's major accomplishments, why in God's name would he reopen nuclear talks with Iran. Don't you think that Iran has sized him up by now and realizes his idea of negotiating is complete capitulation by the other side.
Since when has Trump really done anything that demonstrates the working of a coherent mind? The time has come to realize he is crazy and that chaos will follow him wherever he goes.
America is along for the ride.
9
I read this from another source: “Trump in an interview with NBC’s ‘Meet the Press’ said he is ‘not looking for war’ with Iran, but warned of ‘obliteration like you've never seen before’ if Iran resumes its efforts to build nuclear weapons.”
I cannot do anything to stop this, but if you are a businessman, an oil producer, a Saudi potentate, a bond trader, a banker, a person at the top echelon of finance, you had better talk very quickly with the President, and his son-in-law Jared.
Such obliteration would cause the world economic order to collapse in ways I cannot even imagine.
14
When Susan Rice started laying out step by step what Trump should do I stopped reading. The idea that he or anybody in his administration could think 5 steps deep is just laughable. For Trump step 1 is call Hannity over at Fox and step 2 order McDonalds.
30
@Mark Kronenberg:
Do you really mean to say that "he or anybody in his administration could think 5 steps down is just laughable?
I think the fact he is incapable is not laughable; it is terrifying!
Ms. Rice, good points all and those of us on this forum have already articulated one or more of these already. However you can ask to be invited on Fox and Friends or one of the other hosts and repeat it. Apparently that is the only TV Network he watches. Also pretend you were not part of Obama's National Security team or denigrate him ( with prior notice to Obama) to get Trump to look on you kindly...
2
If only this presidency would end in 10 minutes and a mere 150 lives were at stake.
Added to Don's inability to avoid and provoke war with Iran at the same time (or walk & chew gum), his self-imposed Anti-Obama doctrine means that he can never appear to "go down the path that President Obama went down," to quote ICE woman.
4
I am intrigued that not only Pompeo and Bolton, but also CIA Director Gina Haspel, were reportedly all in favor of the strikes that Trump called off. We can 'stipulate' that Trump made the right decision all we want, but from where I'm sitting, Trump's foreign policy advisers look like rabid and dangerous neocons.
27
If your only tool is a hammer, then every problem looks like a nail. That sums up Trump's foreign relations policy. Give a narcissist nuclear weapons, he approaches all diplomacy with bluster and threats almost daring non nuclear countries to try his patience. (Of course, he acts differently when his fellow nuclear club members, including North Korea, China and Russia, are in the room.).
We need new checks on the use of the nuclear code. It is the only way to bring intelligence and diplomacy back to the bargaining table.
10
Susan Rice:
a fully functioning rational adult.
8
19 years ago, W came into office going on about his "Axis of Evil" namely Iraq, Iran, and North Korea.
He wasted no time invading Iraq, which remains a mess that has cost untold treasure and countless lives.
Trump continues to tap dance with North Korea, no war because the actually have nukes.
Now Iran, pushed by the same Republican chicken hawks that populated W's White House.
John Bolton...now there's your Deep State.
13
If you send this well written editorial to Tucker Carlson perhaps he can read it to the President so we don't get into a needless war.
12
We are going to war, folks. The Winds of War are in the air, and no, they are not figurative things. They are real. There's way too much negativity in the air and dysfunctionality, and ill intent. President Trump and the Republicans are simply part symptom and part metastasizing disease.
7
War is the insanity of humanity.
2
Can we picture Donald Trump taking advice from Susan Rice? Ummm........
Well, she had the decency to do her best. More than Koch driven Pompeo or trigger happy Bolton, all at others’ expense. Our expense.
4
Please tell us why the opinion of a government official who unnecessarily unmasked American citizens (and then lied about it) and who lied about Benghazi? Karma is real though - her son is smart enough to be a Republican.
1
Great analysis Ms. Rice. Unfortunately, you are attempting to impose order on chaos and that will make you crazy.
Your president lurches from one bad decision to another, alienating friends and allies. Borrowing like a drunk at the payday loans store.
The Iran problem won’t be the end. It will just hurry things along.
I despair for the United States. It’s like helplessly watching an old friend as his life unravels.
8
Cut to the chase: how to allow Iran's oil to flow into the world market again, while saving face.
And then, how to get the world off oil.
4
Why anyone would think Pres. Trump has the intellectual capacity to think through these five suggestions is beyond me. He's incapable, and his advisers, if capable are probably unwilling. The Trump team is sorely lacking in anything resembling the maturity necessary to wield the power at their disposal.
6
I understand that Ms. Rice has a long list of credentials.
But if anybody thinks her view makes any impression on anybody in the Trump administration then they are living in wonderland.
The article might be titled how the Obama administration would do it better and differently as when they showed how successful they were on following through on red lines in Syria.
3
I hardly know why Susan Rice, President Obama' national security adviser, would offer advice to Trump, whose foreign and domestic policies have only one thing in common: Trump's need to do the opposite of anything Obama did. I have to conclude that Rice's sober advice, if acknowledged, will only drive our thin-skinned resentful president to more erratic crazy extremes.
4
@displaced New Englander
She is outlining a course of action that an effective leader would take.
4
The streets in Iran are lined with pictures of young men killed in a previous war (guess which side the USA supported) . It is highly unlikely that they want to see new ones.
Maybe if the US adopted a similar strategy they might get into less wars.
2
Dr. Rice does well here: lots of good ideas, and the options offered are all worth considering -- esp getting Bolton and Pompeo out of the WH.
5
Ah yes...if only
Finding a way to leverage his massive mistakes while demonstrating the will and capacity to climb down is our least bad option
was at all meaningful to the megalomaniacs on NSC etc.
The most likely scenario is that there won't be any change
in this country's drumbeat march to squeeze Iran as hard
and as unilaterally, without negotiation, as possible to provoke more of the same ambiguously instigated events as the drone intercept that can then be met with "firm reprisals".
The reason is clear. Those running NSC + State believe Iran is in such a desperate state that it can be convinced to capitulate on all American demands without any negotiations. Period. End of diplomatic efforts.
What they need and desperately are looking for is an Iranian provocation that will cost this country something much more than a sacrificial drone. Once that happens, there is nothing that will prevent a military tit for tat from getting started and
not very easy to stop once started.
What is mysterious in this is how this asinine cover story emerged. Whose idea was it to stage an about face and why. Wasn't it to give the impression that this country isn't as bloodthirsty as it appears to be at present?
The appearance of moderation
over a downed drone gives trump the creds needed
to go at Iran upon the next incident of border
incursion, firing on an aircraft, or worse. That is presumably
the basis for this media cover story.
2
Bolton and Pompeo - gone. Send Bolton away with a bottle of shaving cream and a very sharp razor. Susan - well done. Calling a spade a spade always your strength. So, time to get rid of some real Turkeys in our administration. The biggest one of course wears a red squirrel skin on his head. Thinking that if indeed Trumputin actually (Heaven forbid) gets the Republican Party Presidential nomination then American voters will promptly clean out the huge expanding swamp in Washington. Now, in terms of making the world safe for Democracy and our Republican form of government - Cadet Bone Spurs is - day by day - eliminating the appeal we have long had to the world. A sad can of worms. So, folks, register, contribute, do your homework, vote. Let us bring this sad chapter in our Nations history to an end. Dump Trump, Ditch Mitch, send Lyndsey Graham into permanent retirement, overturn Citizens United. That Supreme Court Decision has taken us down the road to the mess we are in now. Add Mitch Machiavelli McConnell and you can clearly identify the genesis of our downward spiral.
8
There is a step missing in Ms. Rice's well conceived route back to stability: Convincing Trump's top advisors, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham and Tucker Carlson, to go along. Trump doesn't read the NYT.
9
Quoting Rice: ‘He should make plain that 3 things would force consideration of a United States military response — attacks on American personnel, Iran rushing to acquire the fissile material for a bomb and any direct Iranian attack on Israel.’
Exactly - Iran is a sideshow and not a power to take the focus off of more pressing issues such as Chinese and Russian ascension - both of which need concerted containment and engagement.
Russia has no exports of note at all other than fossil fuels which it uses to finance its’ military resurgence - after paying off Putin and cronies.
China took advantage of post 9-11 interventions to boost its economy ( in South Asia, Asia and Africa primarily) and its’ military - including via the first overseas Chinese military bases in history. Any technical progress on their part has been by stealing and reverse-engineering Western inventions and learning-on-the-go.
The Israelis (rightfully so) contain emerging nuclear threats in the region (ex: Osirak in the 1980’s, Syria in 2007 and knocking off Iranian nuclear scientists along the way as well as Stuxnet). They should continue on this track until Iran crosses one of the 3 lines Rice notes and then we can worry about war.
The greatest failure of the US since WW2 has been to get bogged down in unnecessary conflicts on a large scale when it can maintain its edge at a distance and utilize its’ creativity - i.e.: no more: Korea’s, Vietnam’s, Afghanistan’s or Iraq’s!!!
3
Iran should propose to Trump the multilateral Iranian nuclear arms control pact that he walked alway from. To get his signature, Iran can change the name to “Trump’s Magnificent Brilliant Plan™️. The Iranians can accompany this will lavish praise and promise of a Trump casino and result in Tehran. Trump will immediately endorse it.
4
If you look at everything Trump has done in his life, it is clear to see Trump believes that if you have an advantage you should exploit it in every situation. It should be stated loud and repeatedly that this is a juvenile notion. This is a notion that should never be held by the President of the United States.
As an Iranian spokesman stated on NPR, Trump is holding a knife to the throat of the Iranians and demanding a better deal than the one that took years to form and was agreed upon by many countries in the United Nations. Trump thought he could do better and reneged on the promise agreed to by all those countries and us, and then threatened the other countries with sanctions if they live up to their commitment.
Where are we as a country when this can happen? How many US soldiers will have to die before this ignorance will be seen and understood? Will the US media bend over backwards to make the war with Iran something that had to be done for the good of the world? When will we say that we have lost our way and remove all those that support this disaster we call President?
3
I applaud Susan Rice for this piece. She was in the room with G.W. Bush when decisions were made about Iraq, and understands how emotions can quickly get in the way of sound decision making.
Giving this president an unemotional, step by step process designed to keep the peace can only help, if this president can keep his hawkish advisers and cabinet members at bay. Certainly naming particular members of the State Department, past or present could prove decisive, if the president chooses to heed this prescient warning from an experienced public servant, and a member of his own party, (which matters mightily with Mr. Trump).
I pray that Mr. Trump discards his dependence for once on his hawkish, imbalanced, hyper aggressive warmongering team, and considers the fact that a war weary American public, with an apparently strong though sputtering, economy of the president’s own making desires no war with Iran.
Why on Earth didn’t Trump find the courage to leave Mr. Obama’s hard won treaty with Iran in place? I’d like to think in this case, Mr. Trump has learned a lesson.
2
I believe that you are sadly confusion Susan Rice with Condoleeza Rice. One is a Democrat, another a Republican. Both are much better prepared and rational than the current WH team.
9
Ms. Rice, I think Donald Trump wishes to avoid a war with Iran but he is driving a runaway stagecoach. In the traces are SecState Michael Pompeo and your current successor, John "Regime Change" Bolton. He can't handle them.
It is scary to think that America was mere minutes away from opening a war with Iran--and for no good reason. When told that "only" 150 Iranians would have died, the president is said to have changed his mind, and not for humanitarian reasons. Even more chilling is that Pompeo and Bolton would not have given a moment's thought to the fatalities that an American strike would have authored. To them, life is cheap. I think the American president devalues life even more than they do, but for some unfathomable reason, he stepped back from the brink. His hotels around the world?
Unfortunately, not a single one of your five points will be heeded by the president. He is stumbling around in the dark, perhaps now aware that his uncoupling of America from the Iran nuclear agreement in 2015 has left him looking both belligerent and foolish and without anything like a fallback plan. He could reverse course tomorrow--or in 10 minutes--and our shrinking alliances overseas would doubt his sincerity.
Perhaps he now realizes that even though his two hawks want a war with Iran, his fingerprints will be all over any hostilities with Iran forever. Long after Pompeo and Bolton have exited stage right, the president would have to answer for a war.
He'll have no answer.
8
Smart words, but Trump is only a two-word person - yes or no, this or that, and we can now see how he does both all the time, and thus evades accountability..Agreeing to strike, then disagreeing - that is the Trump pattern. Except on taxes and the earth. He wants to keep all his money and he wants to destroy the natural environment..Too bad these two things are not part of his this AND that pattern.
5
Who benefits and feel securer from the total destruction of the Middle East? Only Israel comes to mind.
8
I think a majority of the electorate wants an invasion of Iran.
Until the elections say otherwise, Trump has voter approved carte blanche to bully the world, and that includes our former allies.
Doh, the Stable Genius needed help to weigh the difference between shooting down a drone and bombing live targets. Normally, he wouldn't care but someone told him he'd sound "presidential" if he talked about it not being "proportional." What's the over/under on how many times he'll use the word in the next month? A thousand? And somehow he's being portrayed as this judicious leader. Save us.
6
The suggestions need to be re-written or recast to incorporate the guidelines for approaching a narcissist. These are spelled out in any number of psychology websites that voice strict caution on the subject.
4
If only Susan Rice was president. Her prescription for negotiating with Iran is sensible, substantive, well thought out. All the things that this president is not. He is a shoot-from-the-hip kinda guy you see.
Hey, he was elected to disrupt! To shake up things in Washington. To clean out the swamp.
We have been lucky so far that his ineptitude and total lack of judgment has not gotten us into a war with any number of nations. But how long can our luck hold out?
I watched Fox News today and it was as if I was in a parallel universe, the way the on-camera talking heads were praising how he dealt with Iran as if he was Winston Churchill. May we live in interesting times.
13
If Trump is indeed speaking truthfully, then the fact that he waited until practically the last minute, then "thought about it for a second" shows that his decision making process is truly a chaotic mess.
Trump attempts to spin himself as thoughtful and compassionate, while in 2 years he has never once exhibited those particular qualities.
He fumbled and stumbled into the right decision.
18
Trump’s “strategy” on foreign policy has been revealed as “bully and threaten, but then capitulate”. He did it here with Iran. He did the same with North Korea, threatening “fire and fury” but then ending up the rube victim of a stall campaign. He did the same with his Canada and Mexico, threatening to destroy our North American allies with devastating tariffs before agreeing to fairly modest changes to NAFTA while renaming it so Trump could declare victory. He’s doing the same with China and Xi, who knows that he needs a Trump-declared victory before the 2020 election, so like North Korea they will just wait him out.
Like the prototypical bully, Trump doesn’t really want a fight with anyone; he just wants a reputation as a tough guy so people fear him. The problem is, eventually words are not enough and the bully has to fight to keep his place. Bolton and Pompeo are smart guys and know how to manipulate an insecure, vain man like Trump. Eventually the bully will be convinced he needs to fight to keep his place. Hopefully, when it happens—and it will—it will be more something more like Grenada and less like a Middle Eastern Vietnam, which is what a war with Iran would start.
7
I have been wondering if Trump was persuaded to call off the attack because he truly cared about the 150 lives. That kind of compassion may be in his soul but there are precious few examples of him showing such concern for other humans. I rather suspect he realized this could be a huge POLITICAL mistake if the mission crept to something he couldn't control. Tucker Carlson seems to have been the voice he listened to the most on this shenanigan and didn't Tucker say he could kiss his second term goodbye if this thing spiraled into the very kind of mess he promised he'd never get us involved in? I never thought I'd be thanking Tucker Carlson but I am.
7
Though I am a lifelong Democrat, I disagree with so much of this.
First, there is no hard evidence that Iran complied with the Obama deal. Their refusal to open to regular inspections suggests a lack of good faith. Second, lifting the sanctions allowed Iran to foment many terrorist efforts, that were inimical to US interests and values. Third, the renewal of the sanctions is biting hard, and may be causing Iran to act up in the hopes of scaring Americans into kowtowing to their threats. Trump is right to stay the course.
@UU The International Atomic Energy Commission did conduct regular inspections of Iran's nuclear program. They found no violation of the joint agreement.
The multi-national signatories to the agreement generally viewed it as a starting point for further negotiations with Iran. Trump effectively shut off discussion with his withdrawal from the agreement and further imposition of sanctions. He closed doors. He dangerously worsened the US-Iran relationship.
For now, though, as Susan Rice says, "we are where we are." She offers solid steps forward. Regrettably, Trump is unlikely to read them nor is he capable of thinking diplomatically or long-term.
12
Ms. Rice, you have some very good ideas here, but there are too many words. Trump could never read anything this long. If you want him to heed your advice, make a PowerPoint presentation with lot's of visuals, and few words. It should not be longer than five, six minutes max. Best of luck.
11
"But he now has an opening to restart talks on Iran’s nuclear program."
Apparently, and inexplicably, Susan Rice fails to note that Trump is Trump.
Just as Joe Biden fails to note how he wants to have civil interaction with people who now not only (supposedly) disagree with him, but who for eight years would never compromise with him.
Have major "mainstream" Democrats been paying absolutely NO attention to Republicans since 2008?
10
There’s a meme waiting to be cartoonized, with lucy, charlie brown, and a football. sadly, the american people (and the rest of the world) are the football.
3
Eliminating the Iran nuclear threat will require bilateral concessions:
“... a series of reciprocal steps whereby both sides give a little, so familiarity and confidence can be built for more significant discussions.”
Let’s build those bridges, plank by plank.
3
Really Susan Rice. Bill Burns to the rescue? Hardly. I can agree on two thirds of her solutions in working with Iran for a peaceful end, but many of her ideas have been tried and still no resolve. The fear is that Rice promotes just more Neo-Liberal incrementalism and Trump is far more worse with his right-wing pulse. Included in mu concerns is that there no mention from Susan Rice about the sanctions on Iran, or as Trump calls it “economic warfare.” It’s unnecessary and should stop! Shame on both houses. We all know for sure that the U. S. A. needs a new government that will truly be diplomatic. In the meanwhile, lets pray that our government stand-down and keeps the peace.
7
You say “neo-liberal” incrementalism as if it were a curse, but it’s precisely what’s demanded by the situation. Gradual, but steady progress in the right direction is what Rice and Obama gave us, while conservatives give us brinkmanship, chaos, danger and uncertainty.
It’s hard to know if this uncertainty is the product of Trump’s incompetence or his cabinet’s intentional manipulation of his weakness. But in the end, it means the same: people die, money wasted, alliances damaged, opponents emboldened. Another GOP fiasco in the making.
3
Sorry, but this has too many steps for Trump to follow. In my view he is not capable of this kind of logical approach, nor would he tolerate so much hands off and let some diplomats guide the process. In regard to change of Secretary of State I certainly applaud the idea, but who, in their right mind, would take on such a job for such a man as Trump? However, thanks for your reasoned article and for your invaluable insights. We will have to wait for another President who is both willing and capable of carrying them out. They do not lend themselves to the real estate salesman's mentality.
19
@Harold Johnson
The proper term is "Reality TV Star". As a real estate salesman I am very offended.
5
@Jack McL Point well taken. I actually had qualms right after I wrote this and realized it might demean a group of people who do not deserve the association. I was thinking when I wrote it that Trump is trapped in the mind set and role of bringing everything back to real estate and cannot seem to get beyond it and think in more global terms.
4
Ms. Rice; thank for the cogent, step by step guidelines to stabilize the situation.
Do you think some talented cartoonist can illustrate each notion to assure our President understands?
35
The way to prevent a war with Iran is to start making it clear that Republicans will lose millions of votes if the country becomes embroiled in another fiasco of their President’s making. Make the Iraq war the center piece of editorials, the fabricate evidence, the single minded blindness of the warmongering cabinet, and name names, the same names that are here today.
Republicans sacrifice American life (and money) on unnecessary wars.
Turn it into an electoral cost, and the Republican Senate may emerge from its vacuum.
94
@Gerard
Not sure about that. Republicans like wars, it feeds into their warrior mentality.
The way to prevent this war is to convince them it will cost them their children, like in their recent military excursions.
18
@Dan: Except for the fact that the Republicans don't have anything to worry about in this regard: it's other people's children who will die, not their own.
There's a reason the draft was eliminated: too many privileged people's kids were being put in harm's way.
1
Ms Rice's analysis of the impasse in which Donald Trump finds himself and her suggestions for getting out of the untenable and dangerous situation which Mr. Trump's own policies have created would be helpful if the current President and Commander in Chief had the emotional maturity of an adult. However, because Trump's main focus for both foreign and domestic policy is to do the exact opposite of his immediate predecessor (e.g., abolish the Affordable Care Act, remove environmental constraints, withdraw from the Paris Climate and the Iran Nuclear Agreements, etc.), Ms. Rice would probably have more success if she suggested he bomb Teheran. It's called child psychology, but only for very oppositional children.
49
Good luck with that.
The United States will be at war with Iran within a month or two, without allied support outside the Middle East.
7
@Nicholas
"The United States will be at war with Iran within a month or two....."
No, please don't wish this fate. I was glad to see a handful of protesters outside the White House in the photo here, and (as was the case in the run-up to the horrible Iraq War), millions around the world should come out to protest if the war drums beat any louder. Not that it did us any good for the Bush/Cheney war, cooked up for the flimsiest of reasons. War benefits no one save those who make money from it.
48
@Ellen "Save those who make money from it" The people who pay your elected representatives, campaign costs.
2
@David
Unfortunately, politicians on both sides of the aisle (the majority of them) are perfectly happy taking money from the Military Industrial Complex, voting for giant "defense" budgets, and going to visit our "wars" on VIP trips. Fewer than ten Democratic senators voted for last year's trillion dollar war appropriation. It's interesting to see who those ten are...
1
Interesting suggestions that would probably resolve the problem. But they contain one big weakness, they don’t develop Trump’s image as an emperor.
57
obviously she knows the situation well, and the players, and trump should see her as a possible asset.
11
Dr. Rice thinks and communicates as an experienced, educated adult who is looking to de-escalate the situation with Iran. How novel and refreshing!
189
@GTM
Ms. Rice is forgetting that she was together with Samantha Powers and Sec of State Clinton the hawks who persuaded Obama go for a regime change in Libya.
How does Libya looks like today? Better off? And the thousands asylum seekers in Europe?
Certainly none of their children paid the ultimate price.
"First, he needs to sideline his out-of-control national security adviser plus his hawkish sidekick, the secretary of state."
If that step alone is taken, pretty much everything else mentioned becomes will fall into place. Trump claims to be an isolationist, so why would he place two war-hawks in such critical positions? It makes no sense at all, then again nothing in this Administration makes any sense whatsoever.
Great article, but will likely fall on deaf ears over at 1600 Penn.
314
To answer the first part of your question, it’s because Bolton was a frequent guest and vocal critic of Obama on Fox News.
22
@cherrylog754 Sorry. Isolationism? Bullying is isolationist?Trump hired Bolton and chose Pompeo. Bad cop/good cop. They make him look good for pulling back don't they? I don't believe Trump is isolationist at all. He is whatever he needs at the moment to keep himself looking strong. He gets himself in trouble because he does not understand much but loves to show he has the power and could use it. He is all about that.
11
@Cameron
No one wants to work for Trump - that's why he ends up with whoever says they will. e.g. Bolton. Or Pompeo who went from CIA to State. Or Mulvaney who went from OMB to chief of staff.
There are no "pools" of candidates.
5
Aside from a few war mongers in Washington there is no support for a full scale war with Iran. Yes there is an opening due to Trump's cancelling military strikes in retaliation for the downing of the unmanned drone. But the supreme leader of Iran thinks that a deal that was favorable to Iran was already made and it was supposed to be permanent and binding for both sides. Fair enough but did the US congress approve the deal made during the Obama administration and was president Trump bound by the deal?
Any way the crippling sanctions have hurt Iran and more sanctions seem to be on their way tomorrow, By not agreeing to restart talks Iran's government seems unconcerned about how their defiance will hurt the average Iranian. The impasse can only be resolved if Switzerland hosts a summit between the countries that made the original nuclear deal and the Trump administration with additional demands to improve the deal agrees that after a new deal is made and approved by congress no further changes will be demanded by any new US. government. All sanctions will then be lifted and full diplomatic relations will be established 40 years after the hostage taking in 1979 after the Ayatollah Khomeni regime was installed. Talks should not be restricted to Iran's nuclear program but should also include non nuclear issues so that all disputes are resolved long term and not in a peace meal manner.
Patience and perseverance could result in peace.
20
@Girish Kotwal
This all sounds very nice except one or two minor problems. First what makes you think Trump would not change his mind about the terms this deal in mid negotiation. Second what makes you think he would then fulfill his end of the agreement without, again changing his mind. Remember he has over 10,000 verified lies to his credit.
22
@Girish Kotwal
The only "defiance" is that the U.S. defied truth, common sense and its own allies by withdrawing from a successful agreement that nullified a potential threat to nuclear peace.
30
@Girish Kotwal -- just so! And I would not discount Trump's ability to see his way to a breakthrough when previous U.S. presidents have not. After all, he opened relations with North Korea after 50 years of silence.
1
This is all true, but the thing is, Trump will never follow the advice of anyone connected to President Obama.
242
@NM It's also too much work for him.
3
I agree with this very thorough analysis of what should be done given where we are. The President should back off given that he broke from the Iran deal without any reason; that is, given that Iran had been in full compliance with the international deal it struck with JCPOA.
He could reach a new deal, not much different than the previous one, and declare victory. Of course the US should use military force if Iran attacks American personnel, However, I don't see how attacking Israel is a reason for US to get militarily involved. After all, there is no formal military alliance like NATO between the US and Israel. The US could help Israel with a massive airlift, just like Nixon did during the 1973 war.
19
@Dan Botez
You'd better be careful about that "of course". What if the U.S. personnel are in Iranian airspace? Of course our government will assert they were not, but what does that mean? What if it was an accident? (Accidents happen.) What if Iran is willing to say it was an accident and start negotiations? Do you really want to justify starting another everlasting war and destroy another country while degrading our own?
1
@Dan Botez
I can't remember when Netanyahu began to dictate our foreign policy; however, it is obvious that Israel and Saudi Arabia influence this WH, as they have in the past. The Iraq war was a fiasco, costing us a lot. Now, we are again in a conflict area on the border with Jerusalem. What was Kushner, the real estate developer, doing there? What are his qualifications to be active on any level of foreign policy? Pompeo and Bolton will take us to war. Trump is no more qualified to be a CIC than Bush was. We are a huge modern country; how did we devolve into this primitive, ignorant governance?
8
Sounds to me like getting back to square one (ie the pre-Trump status quo) is a significant challenge.
17
Very nice, very well thought out. What I want to know is why Trump seems not to know that Iran was, as you say, in full compliance with the nuclear deal restrictions, or if he did know, and in light of that, why he has been threatening Iran. Even moderate compliance with the deal should have been enough to step up negotiations and reassurances.
When we are dealing with the Great Bloviator, I think we have to scratch "sense" and look at what he hopes to gain. To win the next election, which is all he seems to care about, he has to either look like a hero, and if he avoids a war that "Iran wants," he will be that hero, maybe. But more likely, he himself wants the war in order to assure his re-election. How likely is this country not to re-elect a president when faced with a "fresh" war?
75
@SFR In response to your first paragraph; The nuclear deal was flawed as it did not allow inspection of military bases, and the inspections themselves were so severely restricted the inspection sites could be swept clean before inspectors arrived. This was a very bad deal for the foregoing reasons and more, and Trump was right to cancel it as it was an illusion. The U.S. must now work out a realistic deal to assure Iran NEVER gets nuclear weapons, and not just the 10 year limit. Iran is an existential threat to Israel and a looming, terrorist threat to the entire Western world.
5
@Ronald Ginson
It should be deeply distressing to all here that you put the interests of a foreign (and often outright hostile and atrocious) power before the interests of the United States. That should be seen as treason.
2
Israel has atomic weaponry and the delivery vectors. why wouldn't mutual assured deduction work in this case?
4